Empathy for the devil

Egyptian cosmology

2014-11-24T18:12:00.000+02:00

The Egyptian cosmology was mostly mythological, and partially inspired by the Assyro-Babylonian cosmology, partially determined by the natural processes which were experienced by the ancient Egyptians, some of them being specific to their country, as the yearly cycles of Nile, some of them being universal for any human observer, as the motion in the sky of the sun and of the planets. Since the ancient Egyptians were polytheists and they deified the celestial bodies, it was extremely important for them to compute accurately the moments of emergence of their gods and goddesses. This was one of the most significant causes of the development of astronomy and of cosmogonic myths by the Egyptian civilization. The movement on the sky of the brightest stars was useful for navigation on the seas, while the astronomical objects of our own solar system played a religious and cosmological function.

A logical consequence of the immortality of the immanent central gods of the Egyptian pantheon was the eternity of the Universe. The bodies of the gods composed the physical world. The gods were immortal, hence the world was also eternal. On the other hand, the multi-layered structure of reality, influenced by the Babylonian mythology, depicted the world, with its earths and heavens, as being spatially finite. Still, the Universe before its creation was a spatially infinite chaos, that meaning that only the places inhabited by humans, spirits of the deceased and gods were spatially finite. The god of creation, Atum or Ra, was the ontological and cosmological result of an imbalance between the primordial pairs of deities, which composed so-called Ogdoad. The first god himself, Atum, was a creation of Nu, the initial void, and hence any comparison with Christian cosmogonic myths would be meaningless. Nu was the deification of the primordial watery abyss. The ancient Egyptians envisaged the oceanic abyss of Nu as surrounding a bubble in which the sphere of life is encapsulated. Nu is the source of all that appears in a differentiated world, encompassing all aspects of divine and earthly existence. Of course, a modern scientist can draw a parallel between the emergence of a new creative personified power from the primordial disequilibrium, Atum, and the hypothesized quantum level imbalances of the Planck era, when the matter existed under the form of strings generated by the primordial black holes of the super-string theory. The strings constituted the seeds for the structure formation that took place after the inflation.

The primeval waters may be compared with the spacetime foam of the Planck era, while the ripples formed on the ancestral waters may be paralleled with the strings from super-string theory or with thermal fluctuations from the inflationary cosmologies. The male gods which composed the primary Ogdoad were represented as frogs, while the female deities were represented as snakes. The Egyptian cosmogonies varied by city within the ancient kingdom of Khem, and, consequently, the myths slightly differed one to another in places like Hermopolis, Heliopolis, Memphis, Thebes. If somebody will really want to make a comparison between Egyptian mythological cosmologies and modern quantum physics, he or she would need to associate the snake-shaped goddesses with the waves, and the frog-shaped gods with the particles. But I think that this would be too much even for a time when cosmologies are more literary than the science fiction books.

Atum, the god of creation, conceived the pair of deities Shu, the god of air or atmosphere, and Tefnut, the goddess of humidity or water:

'Shu is the atmosphere, his creation produced a dry, empty space in the midst of the universal ocean, within which all life exist '(Allen, P. James - Middle Egyptian: An Introduction to the Language and Culture of Hyerogliphs, p. 176, Cambridge University Press, 2010).

An analogy between the water-surrounded Earth and the bubble Universes of the inflationary theory is not hard to be realized, although would be quite unlikely to sustain that Egyptians made scientific assumptions about the beginning of the world. And since the newly established Universe needed material items where they did not existed before, Shu and Tefnut gave birth to further deities:

'These are Geb, the earth, and Nut, the sky. [...] Together they define the physical structure and the limits of the created world.' (Ibidem, p. 176.).

The descendants of Geb and Nut are the primary forces of life: Osiris and Isis, Seth and Nephtys. The process of creation is completed with the birth of sun, Horus, the offspring of Osiris and Isis.

Though the Egyptian cosmology appeals to mythological names and trivial metaphors for explaining creation, as many commentators noticed, the Egyptian myths of genesis are not as far from reality as is the solar disc far from earth:

'Although is explained in generational terms, the Heliopolitan view of the creation is therefore less a step-by-step account than a kind of Egyptian Big Bang, in which all creation happened at once, in the moment when Atum evolved in the world, and time itself began.' (Ibidem - pp. 177-178.).

Bibliography:

James, Allen, P. - Middle Egyptian: An Introduction to the Language and Culture of Hyerogliphs, Cambridge University Press, 2010.

Aristotle's political theory and doctrine of golden mean

2014-10-16T21:38:00.000+03:00

The doctrine of the golden mean elaborated by Aristotle in Nicomachean Ethics specified that the virtue always corresponds to the intermediate state, the only one that was understood as virtuous. Virtue was a condition for happiness. Taking into account the fact that human happiness, as it was defined by Aristotle, - unlike the happiness of gods, that consisted in their alleged eternal state of contemplation, theoria, - was given by the opportunity and the equilibrium of an emotion, attitude or action, the happiest individuals were those able to live in accordance with the ethical laws and also in accordance with the laws of society, and not the most powerful ones or those which lived the fullest lives.

But what will happen when a human would have the possibility to select the golden mean for the entire species, becoming thus endowed with the power of a deity, since only the hypothetical beings called gods may have this power at their disposal? More precisely, such a human would have the liberty to choose for the entire humankind, and his subsequent choices regarding the key fields of survival, as the manner of government, the economic policy or the social system will determine the continuity of his species. In other words, a temperate policy regarding the new economical undertakings combined with the preservation of the monopoly of most valued resources and implemented by a universal hereditary absolutist monarchy may prove to be the only way to save the totality of subjects which composes the human species from an otherwise certain extinction, as was the case with the alternate history of humanity that was created for the readers of Dune's cycle.

'Again, we feel anger and fear without choice, but the virtues are modes of choice or involve choice.' (Aristotle - Nicomachean Ethics, II).

Assuming that such a historical scenario will be possible, then we must admit that this human, if he would make a good choice, should receive the right to be called god and his behaviour would be completely virtuous. Moreover, in spite of the confinement of the gods to the immaterial realm of contemplation - as it results also from Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics - a human endowed with the ability of changing the fate of the entire humanity should have effectively the dignity of a god, just that his righteousness will be exhibited through his contingent choices. Therefore, his 'godhood' will be seen in actu, and will not be a theoretical righteousness, as in the case of the entities which populated the mythologies of ancient Greece - the gods of Homer.

Actually, Aristotle's theory or doctrine of the golden mean, that was formulated and exemplified in Nicomachean Ethics, impressed the whole political and ethical thinking of Aristotle, since he used the concept of an ideal intermediate political system both in Nicomachean Ethics and in Politika. Personally, I think that the ideal political system of government from Aristotle's political and moral philosophy was a political consequence of his theory of golden mean.

More precisely, as it follows from the fifth book of Nicomachean Ethics as well as from Politics III.7, we have three types of good, desirable or virtuous systems of government with their corresponding unjust or decayed forms: monarchy (kinship) and tyranny; aristocracy and oligarchy; polity and democracy.

Aristotle is an advocate of the aristocracy - and the spirit of the concept is shared by both main thinkers of European classical antiquity, Plato and Aristotle : for both of them aristocracy is defined as being the rule of the most virtuous citizens, and is recommended as the finest mundane hypostatis of a state (polis). Still, while for Aristotle oligarchy is the deviant form of aristocracy, for Plato oligarchy represents the byproduct of timocracy, hence it is an indirect decayed form of the ideal democracy.

The next pair of systems from the political philosophy of Aristotle is monarchy - tyranny, that speaks about the cases - not so common in the increasingly liberal Greece from the age of the thinker from Stagira - in which the political power was concentrated in the hands of a single individual or of a dynasty that exerted the control over the country - monarchy - and which may decay and become a tyranny, as in the cases in which the king didn't respect at all the wishes and the needs of his subjects.

Finally, we have the pair polity - democracy, where the first term denoted a system of government in which the politics were realized and implemented by the middle class, while the latter described a state where the leadership belonged to the poor, that represented the biggest majority of the population. Considering these depictions of the systems of government from the point of view of an ancient Greek - which lived in a time when, as in the whole world in fact, the huge majority of the people was poor - I can say that Aristotle's notion of polity - that was alien to Plato, which classified the political systems only in five types - equals approximately with Plato's democracy, where all the free citizens were able to express their vote, - while Aristotle's political concept of democracy equals rather with the more modern concept of anarchy.

As we may see, the method used by Aristotle to classify the political systems was determined by the criterion of the number of the citizens involved in the act of government. In consequence, we have states ruled by a single man - monarchies and tyrannies -, by a few individuals or families - aristocracies and oligarchies -, or by virtually everybody (that mattered) as in the case of polities, or by everybody in the absolute sense, as in democracies. Again, the golden mean or the ideal government seems to be realized by the political structure located in the middle in accordance with the quantitative criterion, that meaning that the society preferred by Aristotle is aristocracy. Is not insignificant the fact that aristocracy - the government of the best, aristoi - corresponds to Plato's virtuous aristocracy, whose utopic state from Politeia was ruled by the most noble by nature inhabitants, the philosophers-kings, but which technically was an aristocracy, since the virtuousity of a citizen was appraised from his or her early childhood.

It is almost unnecessary to say that 'the government of the few' or 'the leadership of a socio-political class' - that corresponds to the golden mean - is nearer to kingship and tyranny than to the more 'populist' pair polity - democracy. Aristocracy represents the intermediate political system, and hence it will appear to be the best type of state in a literal interpretation of the theory of golden mean. Aristotle conceives three types of virtuous systems, and aristocracy is placed, quantitatively speaking, in the middle. Therefore, aristocracy will correspond to the virtue because will be more likely that the most ethical citizens of a polis - the best - to be significantly fewer than the entire middle class, which represents polity. Also, the aristoi will be more than one, which is the number of the monarch. This seems to be a clear case where the point of equilibrium is located near to the negative limit (or near to the defect’s edge) than to the excess’ edge, as was also the case with some of the examples provided by Aristotle in his Nicomachean Ethics.

According to Aristotle, this fact occurs because the humans have the tendency to listen some propensities that:

[either are] drawn from the thing itself; either [are] drawn from ourselves; for the things to which we ourselves more naturally tend seem more contrary to the intermediate.' (Aristotle - Nicomachean Ethics, II).

Therefore, if our emotions, traits of character, will, and so forth incline us to consider self indulgence as being nearer to temperance, that meaning that the limit of excess should be closer to the golden mean, while insensibility would represent rather an unnatural state, this should not exclude the existence of some situations in which the nature of our behaviour - as is the case of serenity - should make us to place the golden mean nearer to the defect’s edge - that means next to the limit that corresponds to indifference - than to the excess’ edge, represented by irascibility.

We have situations in which the so-called golden mean is placed either to the left or to the right of the geometrical center not only because of our nature, but mainly due to the nature of the thing itself, as in the case of courage, whose qualification as golden mean depends both by the moral beauty of the attitude and by our own moral and physiological constitution, which already determine us to label courage as being a special disposition, an effect of the virtuous nature of our character - although representing normality - reason for why is though considered as an intermediate state. In the case of courage its upper limit, bravery, seems to be nearer to it than its lower limit, cowardice.

Of course, applying the doctrine of golden mean to the three possible good or natural systems of government of Aristotle we will see that aristocracy will be located in the middle, having a preeminent place, fact that may be explained both philosophically - in accordance with Aristotle's political theory - and empirically - since the most political systems of antiquity were constituted by a limited number of individuals, only sometimes by just one king, and rarer by a relatively extended middle class, as in the case of polity.

The Aristotelian literary sources suggest us an emergency preference of the Stagirit for polity - the rule of the moderately rich middle class - and he even presents a justification for the eligibility of a system led by this category:

'because those who possess the goods of fortune in moderation find it easiest to obey the rule of reason' (Aristotle - Politika, IV, 11, 1295 b4-6).

2014-08-30T12:58:00.000+03:00

Ville Valo and Natalia Avelon - Summer wine

Aristotle's 'golden mean'

2014-08-17T23:10:00.000+03:00

The doctrine of the golden mean elaborated by Aristotle in Nicomachean Ethics specified that the virtue always corresponds to the intermediate state, the only one that was understood as virtuous. The virtue was a condition of happiness. Taking into account the fact that the human happiness, as it was defined by Aristotle, - unlike the happiness of gods, that consisted in their alleged eternal state of contemplation, theoria, - was given by the opportunity and the equilibrium of an emotion, attitude or action, resulted that the happiest individuals were those able to live in accordance with the ethical laws and also in accordance with the laws of society, and not the most powerful ones or those which lived the fullest lives.

But what will happen when a human would have the possibility to select the golden mean for the entire species, becoming thus endowed with the power of a deity, since only the hypothetical beings called gods may have this power at their disposal? More precisely, such a human would have the liberty to choose for the entire humankind, and his subsequent choices regarding the key fields of survival, as the manner of government, the economic policy or the social system will determine the continuity of his species. In other words, a temperate policy regarding the new economical undertakings combined with the preservation of the monopole of the most valued resources and implemented by an universal hereditary absolutist monarchy may prove to be the only way to save the totality of subjects which composes the human species from an otherwise certain extinction, as was the case with the alternate history of humanity that was created for the readers of Dune's cycle.

'Again, we feel anger and fear without choice, but the virtues are modes of choice or involve choice.' (Aristotle - Nicomachean Ethics, II).

Assuming that such a historical scenario will be possible, then we must admit that this human, if would make a good choice, should receive the right to be called god and his behaviour would be completely virtuous. Moreover, in spite of the confinement of the gods to the immaterial realm of contemplation - as it results also from Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics - a human endowed with the ability of changing the fate of the entire humanity should have effectively the dignity of a god, just that his righteousness will be exhibited through his contingent choices. Therefore, his 'godhood' will be seen in actu, and will not be a theoretical righteousness, as in the case of the entities which populated the mythologies of ancient Greece - the gods of Homer.

Actually, Aristotle's theory or doctrine of the golden mean, that was formulated and exemplified in Nicomachean Ethics, impressed the whole political and ethical thinking of Aristotle, since he used the concept of an ideal intermediate political system both in Nicomachean Ethics or in Politika. Personally, I think that the ideal political system of government from Aristotle's political and moral philosophy was a political consequence of his theory of golden mean.

The next pair of systems from the political philosophy of Aristotle are monarchy - tyranny, that speaks about the cases - not so common in the increasingly liberal Greece from the age of the thinker from Stagira - in which the political power was concentrated in the hands of a single individual or of a dynasty that exerted the control over the country - monarchy - and which may decay and become a tyranny, as in the cases in which the king didn't respect at all the wishes and the needs of his subjects.

As we may see, the method used by Aristotle to classify the political systems was determined by the criterion of the number of the citizens involved in the act of government. In consequence, we have states ruled by a single man - monarchies and tyrannies -, by a few individuals or families - aristocracies and oligarchies or by virtually everybody (that mattered) as in the case of polities, or by everybody in the absolute sense, as in democracies. Again, the golden mean or the ideal government seems to be realized by the political structure located in the middle in accordance with the quantitative criterion, that meaning that the society preferred by Aristotle is aristocracy. Is not insignificant the fact that aristocracy - the government of the best, aristoi - corresponds to Plato's virtuous aristocracy, whose utopic state from Politeia was ruled by the most noble by nature inhabitants, the philosophers-kings, but which technically was an aristocracy, since the virtuousity of a citizen was appraised from his or her early childhood.

Is almost unnecessary to say that 'the government of the few' or 'the leadership of a socio-political class' - that corresponds to the golden mean - is nearer to kingship and tyranny than to the more 'populist' pair polity - democracy. This seems to be a clear case where the point of equilibrium is located near to the negative limit (or near to the defect’s edge) than to the excess’ edge, as was also the case with some of the examples provided by Aristotle in his Nicomachean Ethics.

According to Aristotle, this fact occurs because the humans have the tendency to listen some propensities that

'[either are] drawn from the thing itself; either [are] drawn from ourselves; for the things to which we ourselves more naturally tend seem more contrary to the intermediate.' (Aristotle - Nicomachean Ethics, II).

Also, we have situations in which the so-called golden mean is placed either to the left or to the right of the geometrical center not only because of our nature, but mainly due to the nature of the thing itself, as in the case of courage, whose qualification as golden mean depends both by the moral beauty of the attitude and by our own moral and physiological constitution, which already determine us to label courage as being a special disposition, an effect of the virtuous nature of our character - although representing normality - reason for why is though considered as an intermediate state.

In the case of courage its upper limit, bravery, seems to be nearer to it than its lower limit, cowardice.

Of course, applying the doctrine of golden mean to the three possible good or natural systems of government of Aristotle we will see that aristocracy will be located in the middle, having a preeminent place, fact that may be explained both philosophically - in accordance with Aristotle's political theory - and empirically - since the most political systems of antiquity were constituted by a limited number of individuals, sometimes by just one king, and rarer by the majority of the citizens, as in the case of polity, and only exceptionally and temporary by a mob, as in the case of Aristotle's version for democracy.

Back to top

2014-08-14T12:45:00.001+03:00

The Rasmus - Justify

The Renaissance moral ideas of Frank Herbert’s Dune saga

2014-07-04T00:43:00.000+03:00

by Bogdan Christian Blascioc

The necessity of evil from Frank Herbert’s Dune saga -
A Renaissance-inspired analysis

Introduction

Christianity, from late antiquity to Renaissance and even further, told us that: ‘Man is the centre and the purpose of the entire creation’, but the conceptions were changed with the passing of time. After the scientific revolution, history witnessed a shift in anthropological beliefs, while the current views stipulate that the world does not have any immanent or transcendent finality, and the human species represents just a fortunate accident of nature (from the perspective of humans, of course).
One of the core philosophical ideas of Frank Herbert’s Dune was enunciated at the beginning of one of its chapters, in a koan-like style:

‘The Universe doesn’t have a center’ [physically or metaphysically].

The cycle, composed from six original books - that were continued with prequels and sequels by his son, Brian Herbert, and an associate writer, Kevin J. Anderson - presents an alternate future history of humankind, a long time after our current epoch, when our race will be spread throughout a good part of the Universe.
The history is convincing due to its realistic elements: the humans exhibit the same complexity of emotions and intentions, the technology is not overwhelming, and the social relations remind us by the feudal age.
I think that Frank Herbert initiated a new literary subgenre of science fiction, a subtype in which religion receives a bigger importance. Is no coincidence the fact that the same author, together with the poet and the writer Bill Ransom, produced a second science fiction cycle, in three books, called Pandora, where the religious topics were approached once again.
For a scientist who reads Dune its ecological implications would probably be more important, but for a philosopher, definitely, its theological and religious shades would be more significant.
Maybe it would be useful to mention that Frank Herbert was inspired to write Dune while working as an editor for a newspaper in Portland. Here he received the task to write an article about the dunes of sand from Florence, Oregon. Soon after that Herbert developed the first version of the first two parts of the saga, Dune and Dune Messiah.
One of the tricks used by science fiction writers for maximizing the plausibility of their works was to incorporate tacitly the real history of humankind or even to locate the plot of their books within the contemporary age, in the recent past or in the near future. It seems that Herbert preferred the first possibility, and his Duniverse was placed in the distant future.
The central moral idea of the first two thirds of the cycle - that reaches its apex during the fourth part of the saga, Emperor-God of Dune, - was the legitimacy of the absolute power in an edge-case, a case in which certain immoral decisions seem to be the only choices. Both the main characters of the first four books - Paul Atreides, as hero of the first two, and Leto II Atreides, as hero of the third and the fourth, - become the absolute rulers of the Universe and are considered gods by all the populations of the world, excepting the nobility.
For a better understanding of the situation I ought to say that all the scattered worlds where humans are spread according to the story - except for some notable cases, as that one of the penitentiary world of Salusa Secundus or that of the sanctuary-planets named Antanta-Tupile, which are reserved for the defeated Houses - are populated mainly by serfs or peasants - called ‘pyons’ - and which represent the social basis of a quasi-medieval social system. At the top of this system were located the so-called Houses Major, which resemble the royal families of our history, and which governed over the ignorant masses of people qua ‘siridars’ or planetary governors. The House Minor, instead, correspond to the earls of the reality, more exactly, to those earls that don’t have extensive political duties, like those of ruling a world.
Still, the entire political chessgame opposed these Great Houses, their economical and political organizations and ‘Bene Gesserit’. The heart of the plot is the fight of all the factions to control the known Universe. The highly addictive geriatric spice - which will be explained later - is the most expensive substance, enhancing mental powers and ruling the economies. If the Great Houses, the Emperor and Guild's Navigators chosen to take their shares from Dune's natural treasure, Bene Gesserit wants to assume the political power creating a sort of superbeing, which will allow them to subdue the whole humanity, already indoctrinated with tales about the advent of this creature.
In this 'dark new world' the common people were put in the background. Nobody in the narrative ever speaks about them, but in the best case the conversations were centered around the idea of controlling one or another of the worlds inhabited by them. Dune’s Freemen are the only common people which are mentioned quite often and which are heavily involved in the plot. Moreover, beginning with Dune Messiah they become tools of the Imperial power.
The action of the books speaks about a Universe in which humanity was spread across thousands of galaxies. The world is led by an Emperor, which presides over the Assembly of the noble houses - ‘Landsraad’ -, Landsraad and ‘Spacing Guild’. The Emperor himself is a representative of a noble house, namely the House of Corrino, which provided the monarchs of the Universe for the last 10.000 standard years prior to the beginning of the plot.
The ‘(Spacing) Guild' owes its mathematical knowledge applied to the spacetravel to the constant abuse of melange. The melange or the geriatric spice is a byproduct of the physiological processes of a native animal species from Dune, the sand-worms. This substance has psycho-dynamic properties, and its daily consumption is absolutely necessary for the Guild Navigators to allow them to achieve a heightened awareness and to see the safe spacetime paths when they drive their spacecrafts.
The Guild has the monopoly of the interstellar travel, and hence it constitutes more than a professional class: it is a sui generis pillar of power.
A different pillar of power is ‘CHOAM’. CHOAM is an inter-planetary corporation whose board members are appointed by the Emperor and by the Great Houses. Basically, CHOAM constitutes the economic correspondent of the political chessboard.
The fourth pillar of power is ‘Bene Gesserit’. In Dune’s Universe, religion is used by the nuns of Bene Gesserit as a control tool for enslaving the masses of planetary denizens. This is the function of the so-called ‘Missionaria Protectiva’, a theo-political organon of Bene Gesserit that spreads religious myths about the genetical desideratum of the order, ‘Kwisatz Haderach’, with the goal of easing the future domination of the known Universe, once Kwisatz Haderach is produced.
The sisterhood prefers the hidden games for power, remaining in shadow, as a silent partner of the Emperor, Landsraad and Spacing Guild.
But, when ‘the man that can be in different places in the same time’ finally arrives, he began to rule the world in a tyrannic way, sending all the former tripods of power, including Bene Gesserit, into the background of the cosmic history.

The fictional context

The plot of the cycle begins when House of Atreides receives the stewardship of Dune, the planet that represented the only source of the psycho-dynamic substance called ‘spice’. The previous governors of the planet, House of Harkonnen, were removed from the stewardship of the planet surprisingly easy, and this is why the duke Leto I reluctantly accepted the task. Still, this kind of offer cannt be refused by a noble House. Everything proves to be a trap in the end, and the switch of the rulers was meant to depose House of Atreides because it started to be perceived as a threat by Imperial House of Corrino. A commando composed by Imperial troops - ‘Sardaukars’ - and soldiers belonging to Harkonnens lands on Dune and remove House Atreides from the helm of the planet. While the Duke Leto I commits suicide, his son, Paul, and his concubine, Lady Jessica, escape into the desert where they will be adopted by the native Freemen. The political control over Dune is given once again to House of Harkonnen, which re-commences its ruthless mandate over the world and its inhabitants.
Encouraged by the emergence of the young Atreides in their lives, Freemen begin to believe in the truthfulness of Missionaria Protectiva and assimilate the teenager with Usul, the Chosen one, or with Muad’Dib, the Saviour of the people and bringer of the peace. This intensifies the fights against the restored government of Harkonnens.
When the young Paul becomes big enough to run a war and command an army, the civil war from Dune takes increasing proportions, determining the Emperor to send a huge fleet there. The Emperor himself makes the tactical mistake to establish his headquarter on the surface of the planet, for a better view of the military actions. The army of Freemen, led by Paul, exploits the advantages given by weather and by the topology of the place, and strikes the opposing army successfully, thus winning the war. Paul proclaims himself Emperor and takes as wife the older daughter of the defeated Emperor, Irulan.
Arrakis (aka Dune) becomes a SiFi Jerusalem or Mecca, while the political power had already moved to the same place since the new Emperor established his capital in the regained planetary fiefdom of his family.
Also, thanks to the springs of spice, Arrakis takes its deserved rank within the economical hierarchy of the Universe. Arrakis - with its capital, Arrakeen - becomes the new axus mundi, being thus very similar with the Ancient Rome of the old Earth. Ironically, the temporary capital of Dune, which had this role during Harkonnen’s regime, is named Chartag.
Paul previously fell in love with Chani, a Freemen woman, which gave birth to the twins Leto II and Ghanima. In consequence, Chani remains his woman even after his official marriage with Corrino’s offspring. The armies of Freemen begin the so-called Jihad, a holy war whose purpose was to spread the word of Muad’Dib in the entire known Universe. Billions of people are killed during the war.
When Paul resigns due to his blindness - that contradicted Freemen Law - and goes in the desert to die, his younger sister, Alia, is appointed Regent until his son, Leto II, will be able to assume power.
Alia is an ‘abomination’ because when she was yet an unborn child she achieved consciousness and access to the memories of her female predecessors due to the overdoses of spice consumed by her mother. She was subjected to the risk of being possessed by one of the spectra of her past, as an inherent consequence of her premature awareness. Opportunist, the ghost of the Baron Vladimir Harkonnen takes charge of her mind.
Therefore, her appointment as Regent shows to be a big mistake. Atreides twins are lost in the desert after a failed attempt of Harkonnens to assassinate them. Thus, Leto II walks on the footsteps of his father, integrating himself in a Freemen tribe and enduring the so-called ‘spice agony’. Finally, he merges his body with those of thousands of sandtrouts - the haploid stage of the sandworms, whose dejections exposed to sun generated the priceless spice -. Thus he manages to increment his strength: his appearances already anticipate the future hybrid that he will become, a half-human, half-sandworm superbeing, able to defeat any enemy, almost indestructible and capable to see the future and the past. Leto II reunites with his sister and eliminates Alia, becoming the second male Emperor of the Atreides dynasty. He rules the entire Universe inhabited by humans about three millenia and a half, and had the pretension that his tyranny saved humankind from a guaranteed end.
To label the implementation of his Messianic project he uses the expression ‘Golden Path’.
Though, the expression 'Golden Path', despite its homophony with the ‘road to liberation’ of Buddhism, designates something different in the peculiar case of the novel. The ‘Golden Path’ is in fact the only safe way that can be followed by humanity for avoiding its extinction. I would rather say that here we have an involuntary irony - since the extinction (of the individuality) ceases to be a purpose, as is the case in Buddhism -.
Following the order of human goods exposed in Aristotle’s theory of virtue from Nicomachean Ethics, the bodily goods, and not the exterior ones, nor the inner ones, become aims or ends in themselves, receiving thus a value per se.
But, quite strange for such a stochastic alternate reality, it seems that the only way in which humanity may step on this Golden Path is in chains - because the humans are too divided by their local interests - and hence the only modality to keep them alive is to lead them as a tyrant.
Leto II chooses to rule the Universe dictatorially, becoming a necessary evil.

The philosophies of life from Dune and their notable predecessors

Philosophically, the pages of the cycle are the drama of a post-Plato conflict between two types of mentalities, the Stoic modus vivendi and the Epicurean ton trópo zo̱í̱s.
Practically, all the House Major, and particularily those involved in the plot, exhibit an Epicurean way of thinking and acting, therefore I can affirm that philosophically we see the evolution of an endless conflict between the ‘Epicureans’ of House Harkonnen, and secondarily House Corrino, and, respectively, the ‘Stoics’ of Dune - the Freemen, Bene Gesserit and House Atreides -.
Why Bene Gesserit were Stoics?
Because I think that the reclusive and sober life-style of Bene Gesserit imposes its subsequent labeling as 'Stoic'. They always made plans on long term, and the importance of an individual was reduced to her participation to the great project of the order. Their supreme scope is beyond them - the creation of Kwisatz Haderach - still, they would like to control the world through it. Their sexuality is used only in political purposes, for manipulation and for selective breeding, sometimes for both.
Rene Guegnon, the philosopher of religions that finally was converted to Islam, defined the Eastern dharmic metaphysics, in opposition with the Western Abrahamic religions, as being deprived of ethics, while retaining only the doctrine and the religious practice, that is common to both.
Following this train of thought I would say that the philosophy of life of Bene Gesserit makes its members human machines, achieving a perfect control of their bodies without having any spiritual or trans-mundane intentions.
Bene Gesserit lived non-hedonically because its purpose required this: the psychic and physical qualities had to be developed during the lifetimes of different sisters, and this was achievable only with discipline and material sacrifices.
Why Atreideses were Stoics, and not Epicureans, as all other House Major?
The House of Atreides is an exception in the picture of big families from Duniverse. I think that is not so hard to understand why Atreideses are different in a positive way. They weren’t really significant in the chessboard of power from Duniverse until they received the challenge of managing Dune, the only planet where a drug nicknamed ‘spice’ was produced. Until then they lived in the Paradise-world of Caladan, and were situated outside of the fights for power of the Houses Major. Once relocated on Dune, they preserved their system of values, while the young Atreides boy, Paul, was educated as a future warrior and general, as all the families of nobles did with their male offsprings.
Why Freemen were Stoics as well?
‘Freemen’ instead were the native inhabitants of Dune, and the extremely harsh environmental conditions of this world helped them to develop a specific behaviour and mentality. Water was scarce, and they were in a permanent war with the previous governors of the planet, the Harkonnens.
The moral virtues were essential for them, and just respecting a severe code of laws they succeeded to survive in the endless deserts of the planet. Almost everything was limited and their continuous struggle with the troops of the local government constrained them to improve their survival techniques and their combat tactics.
Also, similarly to the Romans, the preservation of a certain set of ethical values - what Romans called honesta - was necessary to their further existence. In the same way in which the Roman Republic/Empire depended on the strength of its armies, that were the result of a warlike life-style, the Freemen depended by their skills and laws for their own survival.
Obversely, why the greatest Houses were Epicureans?
At the other hand, the Houses of the Empire, especially the richest and the biggest one - the Houses Major - have a pleasurable and hedonistic life, and consequently, I assume that labeling them as 'Epicurean' wouldn’t be too far from objectivity. In the case of the Houses Major the happiness was always conditioned by pleasure, and the control of emotions, apatheia, could represent an obstacle on the road to happiness.
I think that the studies of Lorenzo Valla and Erasmus from Rotterdam showed that Epicureanism reflected an important common feature of the existences of Epicureans and of Christians. This characteristic is universal because all the humans are searching for happiness. Consequently, you may define the quest for spiritual pleasures of the Christians as the supreme expression of Epicureanism:

'In plain true, there are no people more Epicurean than godly Christians!' (Erasmus, Desiderius - The collected works of Erasmus, The Colloquies of Erasmus, The Epicurean - Epicureus, 1075, 25, University of Toronto Press, Toronto/Buffalo/London, 1997.).

Conversely, you may redefine the most prudent and modest Epicurean lives as being true samples of religious behaviour. Analyzed from the point of view of their effects, both types of virtuous life, the Christian one, and the Epicurean one - with the condition that the latter to be considered ad litteram, as the founder of the school conceived it - will lead to felicity. The arguments brought by Erasmus are packed in a rhetorical foil, but his scope was to exhibit the essential identity between the Christian and the pagan righteousness:

'But if people which live agreeably are Epicureans, none are more truly Epicurean than the righteous and godly. And if it's names that bother us, no one better deserves the name of Epicurean than the revered founder and head of the Christian philosophy, for in Greek 'επικουρος' means 'helper'’. (Ibidem, The Epicurean - Epicureus, 1086, 10, University of Toronto Press, Toronto/Buffalo/London, 1997.).

The stance of Lorenzo Valla is even more radical in the favour of a pleasurable life as a unique way of reaching happiness, and hence virtue, as it follows from De Voluptate.
Therefore, the hedonic life-style of the Great Houses was compatible with the theism of all the local planetary societies. Actually, religion was as necessary for the huge populations of peasants, as the geriatric spice was necessary for the ruling class. The immoral behaviour of the Houses Major was hardly visible for the simple citizens, while the waiting for the Saviour prophesied by Missionaria Protectiva made any sacrifice acceptable in the eyes of the immense enduring majority.
The fact that Bene Gesserit scheduled that this future Saviour to be born in one of the noble families wasn't a problem for the masses, a fact which makes me to infer that the real ethical nature of Houses Major was unknown to their subjects. The felicity of the latter resided, hypothetically, in witnessing the Messiah, and, effectively, in serving patiently their earls.
Maybe that Duniverse couldn't be the theatre of a confrontation between pagans and Christians for the simple reasons that the only real theists were the serfs, which were deprived by any narrative and political significance. Hence, the dialectics of history opposes Epicureans to Stoics, qua dominant mentalities.
The Epicurean nature of this dystopian medieval society of the future was underlined by the author himself, which advanced, with the objectivity of the story-teller, a pagan theory about afterlife. The excessive consumption of spice delivered the individuals to an altered state of consciousness which sustained this odd thesis about humans' subsistence.
More precisely, the ideology, implicit in Herbert’s writing, speaks about the perpetuated memories of the ancestors in the bodily cells of every living human: the men inherited all the male memories of their corresponding genetical line, while the women inherited all the female experience of their lines.
The absence of an absolute death, which is substituted by a sort of cellular existence, lived into the medium of the bodies of our descendants, seems to advocate a balanced life, characterized by tranquility, as the most convenient choice during our only one epi-phenomenal’ or conscious existence.
Then, why not to live fully during your own lifetime, since the after-death has a completely disjunct meaning here?
It seems that Frank Herbert’s version of the Pascalian bet justifies Epicureanism as quasi-general behavioural norm. Since in Duniverse the humans lose their consciousness after death, but not their existences as mental contents of the minds of their offsprings, it seems that the life as a living human is the supreme ontological condition and the happiest state of being. In consequence, the wisest thing to be done by a human will be to live his or her life as pleasant as possible, knowing that his or her lifetime is the only period when he or she can positively do such a thing. Trying and not succeeding to enjoy your life will signify that you are not wise or you do not have the means to exploit hedonically your lifetime, a fact that makes your life a pathetic waste of time. Choosing to live like a monk, in total opposition with the Epicurean values, will lead to a deliberate hedonic - and hence teleological - failure of your life, since you will not be rewarded posthumously by a paternal deity. Finally, living a pleasurable live due to the power of the circumstances - as is the case of the children of the Houses Major - will be the best hazardous plot of your lifetime, and wiser than the voluntary selection of a Stoic life.
Of course, to admit the righteousness of an Epicurean life no matter the destiny of a certain life implies to subscribe to Epicureanism in the same way in which a Christian- as Pascal - already believes in God when he formulates his famous bet.

Aristotle's political theory and the doctrine of golden mean

The sacrifice made by Bene Gesserit will reveal its sublime nature when the goal toward all their efforts were directed will be reached, and the man endowed with the ability of recalling the entire experience of his species will be brought to existence.
Leto II succeeded to impress to humankind the only evolutive path which allowed its survival - this being the Herbertian meaning of the Golden Path. His leadership was necessary:

‘Leto II is an example of the ultimate consequentialist in moral thinking [...] Herbert presents the ultimate challenge: is the very existence of the human beings enough to justify any means? Leto II commits atrocities on a galactic scale, all in the name of creating a human populace that will forever despise despotic rule, ensuring the continued survival of the species.' (Nicholas, Jeffery - Dune and Philosophy: Weirding Way of the Mentat, Open Court Publishing, Chicago and La Salle, Illinois, USA, 2011, The Golden Path of Eugenics by Semler, Stephanie, p. 23.).

Apparently, the only explanation of these crimes is that they were committed for saving the rest of the humankind, the following generations, and while the atrocities remained confined to the human species - fact that is doubtful since the ecological science fiction writer Frank Herbert didn’t give us details about Freemen’s Jihad - the Golden Path may be accepted as a result of a holistic insight in the probabilistic world of sands.
The doctrine of the golden mean elaborated by Aristotle in Nicomachean Ethics specified that the virtue always corresponds to the intermediate state, the only one that was understood as virtuous. Virtue was a condition for happiness. Taking into account the fact that human happiness, as it was defined by Aristotle, - unlike the happiness of gods, that consisted in their alleged eternal state of contemplation, theoria, - was given by the opportunity and the equilibrium of an emotion, attitude or action, the happiest individuals were those able to live in accordance with the ethical laws and also in accordance with the laws of society, and not the most powerful ones or those which lived the fullest lives.
But what will happen when a human would have the possibility to select the golden mean for the entire species, becoming thus endowed with the power of a deity, since only the hypothetical beings called gods may have this power at their disposal? More precisely, such a human would have the liberty to choose for the entire humankind, and his subsequent choices regarding the key fields of survival, as the manner of government, the economic policy or the social system will determine the continuity of his species. In other words, a temperate policy regarding the new economical undertakings combined with the preservation of the monopoly of most valued resources and implemented by a universal hereditary absolutist monarchy may prove to be the only way to save the totality of subjects which composes the human species from an otherwise certain extinction, as was the case with the alternate history of humanity that was created for the readers of Dune's cycle.
Assuming that such a historical scenario will be possible, then we must admit that this human, if he would make a good choice, should receive the right to be called god and his behaviour would be completely virtuous. Moreover, in spite of the confinement of the gods to the immaterial realm of contemplation - as it results also from Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics - a human endowed with the ability of changing the fate of the entire humanity should have effectively the dignity of a god, just that his righteousness will be exhibited through his contingent choices. Therefore, his 'godhood' will be seen in actu, and will not be a theoretical righteousness, as in the case of the entities which populated the mythologies of ancient Greece - the gods of Homer.
Actually, Aristotle's theory or doctrine of the golden mean, that was formulated and exemplified in Nicomachean Ethics, impressed the whole political and ethical thinking of Aristotle. Personally, I think that the ideal political system of government from Aristotle's political and moral philosophy was a political consequence of his theory of golden mean.
More precisely, as it follows from Politics III.7, we have three types of good, desirable or virtuous systems of government with their corresponding unjust or decayed forms: monarchy (kinship) and tyranny; aristocracy and oligarchy; polity and democracy.
Aristotle is an advocate of the aristocracy - and the spirit of the concept is shared by both main thinkers of European classical antiquity, Plato and Aristotle : for both of them aristocracy is defined as being the rule of the most virtuous citizens, and is recommended as the finest mundane hypostatis of a state (polis). Still, while for Aristotle oligarchy is the deviant form of aristocracy, for Plato oligarchy represents the byproduct of timocracy, hence it is an indirect decayed form of the ideal democracy.
The next pair of systems from the political philosophy of Aristotle is monarchy - tyranny, that speaks about the cases - not so common in the increasingly liberal Greece from the age of the thinker from Stagira - in which the political power was concentrated in the hands of a single individual or of a dynasty that exerted the control over the country - monarchy - and which may decay and become a tyranny, as in the cases in which the king didn't respect at all the wishes and the needs of his subjects.
Finally, we have the pair polity - democracy, where the first term denoted a system of government in which the politics were realized and implemented by the middle class, while the latter described a state where the leadership belonged to the poor, that represented the biggest majority of the population. Considering these depictions of the systems of government from the point of view of an ancient Greek - which lived in a time when, as in the whole world in fact, the huge majority of the people was poor - I can say that Aristotle's notion of polity - that was alien to Plato, which classified the political systems only in five types - equals approximately with Plato's democracy, where all the free citizens were able to express their vote, - while Aristotle's political concept of democracy equals rather with the more modern concept of anarchy.
As we may see, the method used by Aristotle to classify the political systems was determined by the criterion of the number of the citizens involved in the act of government. In consequence, we have states ruled by a single man - monarchies and tyrannies -, by a few individuals or families - aristocracies and oligarchies -, or by virtually everybody (that mattered) as in the case of polities, or by everybody in the absolute sense, as in democracies. Again, the golden mean or the ideal government seems to be realized by the political structure located in the middle in accordance with the quantitative criterion, that meaning that the society preferred by Aristotle is aristocracy. Is not insignificant the fact that aristocracy - the government of the best, aristoi - corresponds to Plato's virtuous aristocracy, whose utopic state from Politeia was ruled by the most noble by nature inhabitants, the philosophers-kings, but which technically was an aristocracy, since the virtuousity of a citizen was appraised from his or her early childhood.
It is almost unnecessary to say that 'the government of the few' or 'the leadership of a socio-political class' - that corresponds to the golden mean - is nearer to kingship and tyranny than to the more 'populist' pair polity - democracy. Aristocracy represents the intermediate political system, and hence it will appear to be the best type of state in a literal interpretation of the theory of golden mean. Aristotle conceives three types of virtuous systems, and aristocracy is placed, quantitatively speaking, in the middle. Therefore, aristocracy will correspond to the virtue because will be more likely that the most ethical citizens of a polis - the best - to be significantly fewer than the entire middle class, which represents polity. Also, the aristoi will be more than one, which is the number of the monarch. This seems to be a clear case where the point of equilibrium is located near to the negative limit (or near to the defect’s edge) than to the excess’ edge, as was also the case with some of the examples provided by Aristotle in his Nicomachean Ethics.
According to Aristotle, this fact occurs because the humans have the tendency to listen some propensities that either are:

'drawn from the thing itself; either are drawn from ourselves; for the things to which we ourselves more naturally tend seem more contrary to the intermediate.' (Aristotle - Nicomachean Ethics, II.).

As an effect, the golden mean may be established by the common sense as being located either to the right or to the left to the 'geometrical center' of a given ethical situation. Actually, the mathematically ideal 'geometrical center' of a concrete state with moral implications will remain in most of the cases just an abstract measure, since our contingent choices will establish the golden mean, in its quality of a moral paradigm, almost always in a different place than the geometrical center.
We have situations in which the so-called golden mean is placed either to the left or to the right of the geometrical center not only because of our nature, but mainly due to the nature of the thing itself, as in the case of courage, whose qualification as golden mean depends both by the moral beauty of the attitude and by our own moral and physiological constitution, which already determine us to label courage as being a special disposition, an effect of the virtuous nature of our character - although representing normality - reason for why is though considered as an intermediate state. In the case of courage its upper limit, bravery, seems to be nearer to it than its lower limit, cowardice.
Of course, applying the doctrine of golden mean to the three possible good or natural systems of government of Aristotle we will see that aristocracy will be located in the middle, having a preeminent place, fact that may be explained both philosophically - in accordance with Aristotle's political theory - and empirically - since the most political systems of antiquity were constituted by a limited number of individuals, only sometimes by just one king, and rarer by a relatively extended middle class, as in the case of polity.
The Aristotelian literary sources suggest us an emergency preference of the Stagirit for polity - the rule of the moderately rich middle class - and he even presents a justification for the eligibility of a system led by this category:

'because those who possess the goods of fortune in moderation find it easiest to obey the rule of reason' (Aristotle - Politika, IV, 11, 1295 b4-6.).

Polity will be desired when the ideal virtuousity of aristocracy will not be tangible. In its quality of 'the second-best state', polity stands, as its turn, as a golden mean between oligarchy and democracy. It is interesting that polity is placed in the middle using two different criteria, wealth, which is primarily a qualitative criterion, and the demographics, which is obviously a quantitative criterion, but with clear axiological implication. The richest citizens will be always less numerous than the moderately rich, which, at their turn, will be less numerous than the poor.

‘Golden Path’ and its inherent earthly (real) philosophical back-ground

- the necessity of evil

All the readers of Frank Herbert's Dune know that the political system that sustained the trans-galactic society of our alternate distant future was a quasi-feudal organization of local societies - the so-called system of 'faufreluches' - while at the global level the hereditary monarchy that ruled the entire Known Universe - which firstly belonged to House of Corrino and after about 10.000 standard years was transfered to House Atreides - it became, probably from the time of the first Emperors, a de facto tyranny.
It was quite clear that the oligarchy decayed after a time in tyranny, and that the further decisions made by Atreides Emperors didn't generate a change of the type of the political system. In accordance with the human nature, whose socio-psychological laws and tendencies were reflected by the evolution of Dune's plot, something that initially was intended to be an aristocracy became an oligarchy - or a plutocracy - and shortly afterwards collapsed into a tyranny, stage where remained nailed for ages.
Of course, the purpose of Golden Path instrumented by Leto II Atreides was to save humanity, and not to offer a readable political theory. But if we would try to analyze its consequences from the perspective provided by the historical forms of government from the real world then we will easily see that the natural evolution of these systems of government is shared by those from Duniverse. Leto II Atreides used a morally unacceptable system, the tyranny, to lead humankind toward the only road that allowed its survival.
Insofar as the course of events determined by aforementioned Golden Path has achieved its aim - and it seems that at least this assertion can not denied since the cycle of Dune continues long after the death of the last Emperor - I may say that Golden Path was Leto's political golden mean, since all the other ways of managing the Universe would had led to the extinction of the human species, and hence they should correspond to vice, all of them incarnating as many instances of failure.
Therefore, from a consequentialist and pragmatist point of view, the tyrannical way of leading the world that was chosen by Leto II was the only virtuous modality adequate for performing this task, and the fictional history may prove the truthfulness of this conclusion.
Analyzing the history of most of the major states from antiquity and Middle Ages, as Macedonian Empire, Persian Empires, Mongol Empire, Ottoman Empire we may see that the political success of all these 'extended countries' has relied in good part on the existence of a powerful leader, an autocrat, which gave unity and stability to the trans-national political structure. Implicitly, the quasi-tyrannical epoch of all these states represented the most memorable part of their history, as in the case of the ancient Greek poleis, whose political peak of success was accomplished by the Empire of Alexander the Great, and not by the democracy from Athens, neither by the military timocracy from Sparta. Also, nor the Buddhist short-lived democracy, nor the contemporary corrupted oligarchy, but only the extremely harsh rule of Genghis Han has ensured functionality to the Mongol state.
I am not saying that dictatorship is a good system of government, but I am asserting that there were instances in the history of our species when this type of rule produced positive effects for certain countries. It seems that, empirically speaking, these were cases in which tyranny constituted the golden mean. Of course, the examples don’t include the most progressive states - usually they speak about demographical powers whose inhabitants live from memories - but at least they gave us reasons to explain the practical rationality that lies behind the Golden Path of Leto Atreides.
Indeed, the political decisions made by Leto Atreides didn't concern the domain of intellect, because wasn't practical to neglect the inter-planetary businesses as he did maintaining his subjects in a medieval social system - all the Houses Major were labeled, in Dune Dictionary, as being 'inter-planetary undertakers' -, neither to bear a bloody war of religious conversion - which was in fact a political subordination - with the entire mapped Universe. Also, the decisions done by the last Emperor didn't concern the domain of speculative reason, since Freemen's and Bene Gesserit's god was as human as the nuns which sang the Litany against fear, while his prescience was conditioned by the overdoses of a drug. Similarly, the choices of Leto II didn't concern the faculty of judgment, since the only art mastered by humanity of that age it was the art of politics.
Leto Atreides wanted to save his species, and hence he applied the most suited policy to achieve this scope. Definitely, his categorical imperative was changed drastically when he realized that his purpose is not every human, as an end in himself or herself, but the humanity as a whole, thereby a simple individual may be sacrificed in the same way in which a man spends all his talents to buy the house of his life.
In Nicomachean Ethics Aristotle says that happiness - eudaimonia - is the supreme aim of our lives, being the only condition that is desirable per se and that has an intrinsic value. Basically, all other scopes and ends are subordinated and relative to this supreme purpose, only happiness or felicity can not be a mean for a higher and a different end, excepting a bigger happiness. In other words, happiness may be overcame only by itself, being true that we may have different ways or degrees of happiness, but not that we may have things more precious than happiness, at least this is what follows from the moral doctrine of Aristotle.
At the other hand, is quite clear that this entire psychology of emotions would had been useless without some sentient subjects able to provide the empirical material for the entire discussion. In any hypothetical case in which humanity as a whole would be subjected to the risk of extinction the objective of survival should offer to the humans the highest possible pleasure, becoming even a condition for any further happiness.
In consequence, I think that I have the right to say that the path of survival which was chosen by Leto II Atreides had the highest hedonic value, and had given to the people the biggest conceivable felicity and also constituted the most natural deed, since the main purpose of every living thing is to survive.
Still, may be perplexing the fact that a tyranny was able to constitute the basis for the most Epicurean life-styles, and that it was also capable to have the moral virtues that were familiar to the philosophers from Stoa.
I think that the edge-case exposed by Frank Herbert within the pages of his saga has showed us that in some peculiar circumstances the tyranny may give to the people the chance of living their lives as they would like - once the tyranny itself faded and died, as an already unnecessary political device of history, - and to be in the same time the noblest living paradigm of honestum, despite of its apparent lack of righteousness, which relegated it to the level of the vices in the overwhelming majority of the historical instances.
Although I do not think that Frank Herbert was influenced somehow by Aristotle's moral and political philosophy, I think that the comparison that was just performed by me between the theory of golden mean from Nicomachean Ethics and Leto II Atreides' Golden Path makes sense.
The point of equilibrium of the human species was reached within the clearly outlined frames of tyranny, while the supreme aim of the government was to ensure the survival of the species, and not necessarily a pleasant present life, but a certain future for the descendants of the Imperial subjects. The present good has became secondary when compared with the projected higher good of the survival of the race. Here we can see a zone of convergence between Stoicism and Epicureanism, since the classification of 'goods' and 'evils' relatively to a given contingent context and to its expected evolution in time certainly bears an Epicurean mark.
But taking into account the means used to reach this 'happiness of survival' I would rather say that both the character Leto II Atreides and his trans-galactic policy have mainly Stoic features. Definitely, Epicureans never thought that they themselves - and not some nickel or copper men from the immemorial past - have to sacrifice their pleasures and even their freedom for the sake of their distant descendants, but at most they accepted times of austerity for a future personal prosperity or a happy and short life rather than a longer and painful one.
The Stoics from God - Emperor of Dune have rather Christian shades. In a poetic way, after the twilight of the idol, Leto II, humanity reaches its parousia and receives the right for a new life.
Since the process of saving humankind overlapped the entire life of Leto II and of so many generations of his subjects it would be extremely difficult to say that the Duniverse from God - Emperor of Dune preserved its Epicurean shades from the first book of the cycle, Dune.
Of course, the highest good conceived and applied by Leto II wasn't moral virtue, but the noble aim of survival, which implied a series of decisions and sacrifices.

General conclusions

Although is not presented as a conflict of ideas or of philosophical schools, the dispute between Atreideses and Freemen, on the one side, and Harkonnens, on the other, corresponds clearly to the dialectic tension between Stoic and Epicurean philosophies.
In an essentially immoral world the most ethically valuable individual proves to be the one able to ensure the survival of his species:

‘This violence spurs us on in mutual war until someone emerges with the power and authority to force peace upon us. Hobbes calls this figure Leviathan. Herbert portrays him most elegantly as Leto II.’ (Ibidem - A Universe of Bastards, by Butkus, Matthew A., p. 76.).

At the other hand, peace, that marked almost the entire period of rule of Leto II, is a good in itself, and the most of the societies that aren't structured on the basis of Roman or medieval Mongol principles regarded the peace as a desirable and positive condition.
It would be tempting to say that the peace brought by the autocratic regime of Leto II was an archetypal expression of an ancient human demand, and Frank Herbert himself was inclined to conceive the reign of his hero in a static political background, as in an idealized historical fresco, whose beauty consists in what can be glimpsed above the arched vaults of the cathedral, and not necessarily in the mural painting itself.
It is quite clear that a peaceful political climate should be more appropriate for the accomplishment of the Stoic peaceful inner state, providing an adequate environment for the tranquility of the mind and the righteousness of the life, and precisely this was ensured by the tyranny of Leto II.
Trying to appreciate the philosophy that is immanent in the cycle of Frank Herbert - and even sometimes sparkles above the surface of the lexical tissues taking the shape of the koan-like sentences and phrases, extracted from a fictional library, - it would be easy to see that the Stoic samples of philosophy belong to the big creators and moral fighters of the saga, Atreideses, the Freemen people and Bene Gesserit nuns, while the main exponents of the Epicurean philosophy are usually the negative characters and group of interests: the Harkonnens, House of Corrino or the Spacing Guild.
Consequently, the practitioners of the hedonic life-styles aren't creators, they just benefiting from an already existing system. But, as real history has showed to us, these behaviours are opportunistic, they being possible only within the confines of a stable political and economical system. Even in the case of the ancient Rome, Epicureanism flourished when Rome started to emerge as a military power, although Carthage wasn’t yet defeated, and the most important, the Epicurean way of thinking enhanced its importance as the time passed and the power of Rome became unchallengeable. The Epicureanism started to define a certain mentality, which was criticized by Petronius, in Satyricon, and which finally led to the decline of Rome.
Stoicism instead was by far more popular and was represented by a bigger number of thinkers. Although Stoicism wasn’t directly connected with the policy of Rome, it perfectly expressed the mentality of the citizens of the ancient Rome. As long as Rome was a healthy culture, and not a decadent Empire, the writings of the Stoics had their customers in the same way in which the dialogues of Plato had their own target audience in their own era.
If the core of the definition of virtue, as was understood by the father of Stoicism, Chrysippus, is 'virtue is the ability to differentiate good from evil', then both Atreides Emperors, but especially the son, Leto II, are excellent paradigms or human embodiments of a virtuous life.
Though, it would be important to note that Herbert’s heroes, Paul and Leto II Atreides, are active figures, they are acting and fighting for the future, trying to change those paths that aren’t adequate to their will, that endanger humanity, therefore they adopt an attitude contrary to the serene apatheia of the Stoics, despite of their virtuous lives, that value and appreciate a non-hedonistic happiness, precisely as the Stoics did:

‘So what his Atreides heroes do? Like all the good heroes, they act. No Stoic calmess of mind and imperturbability for them. They foresee the possibilities for the future, they see also which are become more or less probable as they act, they try to steer the course of the history in the direction they want. As oracles, they have a small amount of freedom, to raise the chances whichever possibilities they prefer to happen will happen.’ (Ibidem - Son of the Curse of the Golden Path, by Gates-Scovelle, Sam, p. 217.).

Although it wasn’t intended as a philosophical debate, neither as a literally Academic dialectic dispute, nor as a Scholastic medieval prosaic controversy, nor as a modern university confrontation of divergent ideas, when it is analyzed philosophically the saga of Dune reveals an ideological tension - maybe not so unfamiliar for a neoHegelian - that corresponds to the syncretic ideas of antiquity that were proliferate in the early Middle Age and gave a little bit of colour to the sombre doctrines of medieval theosophia, for achieving a better expression in the more intellectual environment of Renaissance.

Bibliography

Herbert, Frank - Dune, Collection Nautilus SF, NEMIRA Publishing House, Bucharest, 1995, 2005, 2 vol.,
Herbert, Frank - Dune Messiah, Collection Nautilus SF, NEMIRA Publishing House, Bucharest, 1996, 2005,
Herbert, Frank - Children of Dune, Collection Nautilus SF, NEMIRA Publishing House, Bucharest, 1997, 2012, 2 vol.,
Herbert, Frank- The God Emperor of Dune, Collection Nautilus SF, NEMIRA Publishing House, Bucharest, 1998, 2013,
Herbert, Frank - Heretics of Dune, Collection Nautilus SF, NEMIRA Publishing House, Bucharest, 1999, 2013,
Herbert, Frank - Chapter House of Dune, Collection Nautilus SF, NEMIRA Publishing House, Bucharest, 1999, 2013;

Aristotle - Ethica Nicomachea, Scientifical and Encyclopedical Publishing House, Bucharest, 1988/ IRI Publishing House, Bucharest, 1998;

The Epicurus Reader - Hacket Publishing Company, Inc, Indianapolis/Cambridge;

Erasmus, Desiderius - Collected Works of Erasmus, Spiritualia, Enchiridion, De Contemptu Mundi, De Vidua Christiana, ed. by John W. O’ Malley - University of Toronto Press, Toronto/ Buffalo/ London, 1997;

Long, A, A. & Sedley, D. N. - The Hellenistic Philosophers, vol. I: Translations of the Principal Sources with Philo- Sophical Commentary, Cambridge University Press, 1987;

Nicholas, Jeffery - Dune and Philosophy: Weirding Way of the Mentat, Open Court Publishing, Chicago and La Salle, Illinois, USA, 2011, the chapters: Paul Atreides, the Nietschean Hero by Roy Jackson; Son of the Curse of the Golden Path, by Sam Gates-Scovelle; Friedrich Nietzsche Goes to Space by Brook W. R. Pearson; Shifting Sand, Shifting Balance by Louis Melancon; A Universe of Bastards by Matthew A. Butkus; The Golden Path of Eugenics by Stephanie Semler;

Plato (Aristocles) - Politeia, Collection Universitas, Teora Publishing House, Bucharest, 1998, 2.vol.;

Valla, Lorenzo - On Pleasure - De Voluptate, The University of Chicago Press.

Back to Dune

Frank Herbert's Dune - a philosophical analysis

2014-05-28T00:57:00.002+03:00

The pyramid of power within the fictional Dune’s Herbertian Universe before the coup d’etat of the House Atreides:

The Padishah Emperor Shaddam Corrino The Fourth as a representative of Landsdraad

CHOAM = The Spacing Guild = Landsdraad

Bene Gesserit
The feudal system of Faufreluches: siridars,

nobles and
pyons

The pyramid of power of the Known World after the Battle from Arrakis:

The Emperor Paul Atreides as the sole ruler of the Universe/ The Regent Alia of the Knife/ The God-Emperor Leto II Atreides (ruled cca. 3500 standard years)

The Spacing Guild

CHOAM = Landsdraad = Bene Gesserit

The feudal system of Faufreluches: siridars,
nobles and
pyons

The pyramid of power during Middle Ages in the cradle of civilization, Europe:

Popedom

The Catholic church = The biggest Christian king(dom)s -
The free international trade

The local nobles and bishops; and
the peasants

The pyramid of power during Renaissance in the cradle of civilization, Europe:

The Catholic Church with its leader, the Pope, the Protestant Church = The biggest Christian king(dom)s = The free international trade

The local nobles and bishops; and
the peasants

Conceptions, doctrines and conclusions (metaphysical, anthropological, and so forth):

Christianity (and Renaissance):

‘The man is the centre and the purpose of the entire creation’

F. Herbert’s Dune:

‘The Universe doesn’t have centre’ [physically or metaphysically]

Iudeo-Christianity uses the already born and dead Avatar of God to control the inhabitants of Europe. The Christian world, starting with the Emperor Constantine, used its religion as a State or political tool. They even disseminated Christianity in Americas and in parts of Asia, just that they did it for an immediate socio-political advantage, and, secondary, due to a strictly unselfish spiritual reason.

In Dune’s Universe, the religion is used by a relatively small minority - the nuns of Bene Gesserit - as a control tool for enslaving the masses of planetary denizens (the peasants, in general, and the inhabitants of the primitive worlds): this is the function of the so-called Missionaria Protectiva, which spreads religious myths about the genetical desideratum of BG, Kwisatz Haderach (← Kefitzat Haderech = ‘contraction of the way’ קְפִיצַת הַדֶּרֶךְ (in Hebrew)), with the goal of easing the future planned domination of the known Universe, once Kwisatz Haderach was produced and even without this scope being reached. But, when ‘the man that can be in different places in the same time’ finally arrives, he begins to rule tyrannically the World, sending all the former tripods of power, including BG, in the background of the cosmic history.

The spice (or melange) is a metaphor of the nowadays’ oil. Water itself, which is so priceless on Dune, works, according also with the words of the writer himself, as a metaphor for oil, for the clean air, for the water itself or for the economical situation generated by the shortages of oil during the oil-fuelled Energy Crisis. Compared to the Renaissance, the spice may play the role of the gold. Dating back from the medium Middle Ages, one of the two main goals of the alchemists was the production of the gold, having as prima materia other metals, usually iron. Would be like the Inca Empire would had the monopoly of gold, while the viceroy of Spain - which was appointed by the king to manage the precious metal - would take the entire political power in his hands, backed by his huge earnings.

After the prophecies scattered by BG all around the world met their fulfillment, Arrakis (aka Dune) becomes a SiFi Jerusalem (or Mecca), while the political power was already moved to the same place since the new Emperor established his capital in the regained planetary fiefdom of his family. Also, thanks to the springs of spice, Arrakis takes its deserved rank within the economical hierarchy of the Universe. Arrakis (with its capital, Arrakeen) becomes the new axus mundi, being thus very similar with the Ancient Rome of the old Earth. Ironically, the temporary capital of Dune, which had this role during the Harkonnen regime, is named Chartag.

The Imperial religion is Buddislam, but this doesn’t seem to contradict the quasi-divine nature of Kwisatz Haderach, his super-natural mental qualities having the same phenomenology with the effects of sadhana or of the meditative practices from Buddhism, in general. The Golden Path, Leto’s strategy to avoid the destruction of the human species, it is a clear reference to the Buddhism as well. Still, although both Emperors, Paul and his son Leto II, were trained by Bene Gesserit sisters (Jessica, mother of Paul, was a BG nun), their mental capacities were owed exclusively to their overdoses of geriatric spice.

You can also understand the spice as a metaphor of soma (from the Hindu Buddhist & Hindu culture) or of the coffee (initially belonging to the Muslim culture).

Bene Gesserit may correspond to the (Catholic) Church, and since its influence was always confined by various political factors - the last one and the most repressive being the ascension of the House of Atreides on the Throne of the Golden Lion - I think that we may say that this sisterhood resembles with the Church from the timespan between Renaissance and the present days, having a gradually decreasing strength. Due to its specific psychosomatic techniques (as prana bindu - the control of the muscles and of the nerves, or the using of the Voice to subdue other people’s will), BG can be perceived as well as a metaphor of the sangha, the monastery of the Eastern dharmic metaphysics.

I think that the reclusive and sober life-style (modus vivendi) of BG imposes its subsequent labeling as 'Stoic'. They always think on long term, and the importance of an individual is reduced to her participation to the great project of the order. Their supreme scope is beyond them - the creation of Kwisatz Haderach - still, they would like to control the world through him. Their sexuality is used only in political purposes, for manipulation and for selective breeding, sometimes for both, in the same way in which the Church ratified or rejected weddings between the ruling dynasties of the medieval Europe.

The role of the Latin is played by Galach, that serves as lingua franca in Dune’s fictional Universe.

The Guild owes its mathematical knowledge applied to the spacetravel to the stable abuse of melange. This is the practical domain where the prescience of the Emperors (their ESP of foreseeing events before they happen) converges with the limited prescience requested by the craft of sailing within the dynamic frames of spacetime continuum of the Guild Navigators.

Here is a similarity between the theological/ sacerdotal and nobles' monopoly of writing during the Middle Ages and the specialization of the art of spacetravel to the Navigators.

I infer that the relative independence of Guild can be paralleled historically by the homologous condition of the official emissaries of the European crowns in Americas and Asia, which conquered large territories and brought a lot of treasures back home. This was the reason why the kings preferred to give them extended rights over the new lands and to name them viceroys, precisely for securing their further cooperation.

Thus, Guild has become a sui generis pillar of power, being the only element which partially escaped from the control of the Emperors.

The Houses of the Empire, especially the richest and the biggest one - the Houses Major - have a pleasurable and hedonistic life, consequently, I assume that labeling them as 'Epicurean'; wouldn’t be too far from objectivity, especially ‘cause the complete semantic extension of Epicurus’ philosophy, as it was underlined by the studies of Lorenzo Valla and Erasmus from Rotterdam, showed that Epicureanism would be, more likely, an approach of life very similar with the (our) modern modus vivendi.

This conclusion is emphasized by the thesis, implicit in Herbert’s writing, of the perpetuated memories of the ancestors in the bodily cells of every living human: the men inherited all the male memories of their corresponding genetical line, the women inherited all the female experience of their lines. In consequence, since didn’t exist an absolute oblivion, but just an end of the time when a centre of consciousness may express itself in an autonomous and stable way, living a balanced life, characterized by tranquility, would be a very realistic choice to be taken during the ‘epi-phenomenal’ or conscious existence.

The conflicts between the Houses are regulated by specific norms, the only way to legally defeat another House being The War of Assassins, Kanly. Like in Middle Ages, the poisoning was a very common practice. Therefore, the assault of Harkonnens on Dune or the landing of the Imperial troops - Sardaukars - and their subsequent fight with the local Freemen were notable exceptions, both historically and methodologically. These resemble with the noble’s duels from Middle Ages’ and Renaissance’s Europe.

The most skilled warriors: Sardaukars, qua Imperial soldiers of Shaddam, Freemen, qua Crown troops of Atreideses, resemble with the most valuable Orders of Knights, like Teutonic Knights or Templars.

Both the Freemen tribes from Dune - the native planet of the sandworms, whose dejections, exposed to the air, generate the spice, - and the BG’s nuns use overdoses of pre-spice masses named Water of life to induce themselves the so-called spice agony after that a Freemen is accepted as a full warrior and a BG sister becomes a Reverend Mother.

These rituals look more alike with the mysteries of the Pagan antiquity from the religion of mysteries of Graecia Magna - like those from the cults of Apollo or Dyonisos - or with the ecstatic practices from the Indian subcontinent or with those specific to Zoroastrianism.

Paul Atreides, the son of Duke Leto I Atreides, becomes the first Atreides and Dune-based Emperor, being propelled in the head of the Freemen armies by his successful spice agony, which made him a demigod, with extensive prescient abilities. Practically, the man which has returned from the heart of the desert, riding a giant sandworm and leading a huge army of natives, it is a transformed or reborn version of the initial one, which barely escaped from the hands of Harkonnens, as a teenager. His super-natural mental qualities, derived from the consumption of melange and his carefully selected genetic line, allowed him to see the future even after he loses his sight due to an attack with a stoneburner - an atomic weapon.

But the main transmutation takes place one generation later, in the case of his son, Leto II, which will become the God Emperor of the Known Universe for 3500 standard years. Leto II, in the epilogue of the Children of Dune, merges his body with a sandtrout, the haploid phase of a sandworm - and becomes literally an ovule for the ingoing male sexual cell - and transforms himself in a hybrid, half sandworm, half human, but endowed with special physical attributes. He switches his species, but he also changes the species of the organism inserted in his body. The renewed Leto II may be compared with the other desideratum of alchemy, the (re-)creation of the man, anthropos. He preserved his spirit - spiritus -, he retained his soul - animus -, while he modified his body - corpus -.

The transformation worked because his blood was supersaturated with spice, and the sandtrouts were confused. But mentally - animus - and spiritually - spiritus - his changing begun earlier, since he increased gradually his daily dose of spice, extending the spectrum of his self-awareness as an individual and of the self-awareness as a species to the new levels.

Maybe, in the terms of Nietzsche, his grandfather, Leto I, the Red Duke, was the camel, his father, Paul Muad’Dib, was the lion, while himself was the child, the offspring of a new age.

‘Paul Muad’Dib created a religion to unify, then he became The Preacher to destroy what he had created. Nietzsche brings back Zarathustra because the Persian prophet created a religion and has now come back to destroy the belief in a set of values [...]. Zarathustra preaches of the coming of a new kind of man, what he calls the Superman. Nietzsche talks of the future of humanity, a different kind of humanity. The human being is the rope tied between the animal and the Superman. He must overcome himself: the opposite of which is the desire for self-preservation which characterizes the attitude of the last man’. (Dune and the philosophy of the weirding mentat, ed. by J. Nicholas, Paul Atreides the Nietschean hero, Roy Jackson, p. 186.).

Concretely, this accumulated mass of human anaphoras which constituted the diachronic genetic program of BG exploded in the substantial form of Leto II. He succeeded to impress to the humankind the only evolution path which allowed its survival - this being the meaning of the Golden Path. His leadership was necessary:

‘Leto II is an example of the ultimate consequentialist in the moral thinking [...] Herbert presents the ultimate challenge: is the very existence of the human beings enough to justify any means? Leto II commits atrocities on a galactic scale, all in the name of creating a human populace that will forever despise despotic rule, ensuring the continued survival of the species.' (Ibidem, The Golden Path of Eugenics, Stephanie Semler, p. 23.).

‘Clausewitz remarkable trinity highlights the relation between the population, the government, and the military capability that will that will be wielded in a war and provides a framework for understanding the force of this activity. Without a proper balance within this relationship [...] the utility of war for political purposes is highly questionable [...]. Just ask Muad’Dib about his intent to regain a dukal seat that results in becoming emperor at the expense of the thousands of planets and billions of lives.’ (Ibidem, Shifting sand, shifting balance, Louis Melancon, p. 35.).

I think that we can understand the tyrrany of Leto II as being a metaphor of the needed socio-political change that marked Renaissance, as well as the following age until the old feudal system begun to be replaced by the capitalistic societies, with a limited or no room for kings, emperors and their earls. Leto II was the embodiment of the absolute power, and all the other pillars of power (BG, Landsdraad, CHOAM) were removed from the equation, although the feudal system continued to operate on the scattered worlds, that hardly communicated to each other, hence, even the function of the Guild was substantially diminished.

Leto II is a metaphor of the necessity of late medieval or early modern change, exhibiting the irrationality of Popedom and of the customary system of well-defined social classes. In God Emperor of Dune, humanity is frozen in a trans-galactic stage, while during Renaissance the man (fore)sees for the first time the desirability of a political change. Leto II decimates all the sandworms from Arrakis, becoming the only remaining source of spice. Thus, he basically incarnates all the issues and the solutions of his time, as the late medieval real world was frozen in a obsolete shape. His death is the death of the essence of the feudal system - the system of Faufreluches - is the death of the essence of monarchy because all the contemporary monarchies are purely formal, they functioning effectively as free-trade capitalistic republics. Therefore, his assassination was paradigmatic, Leto II himself accepts this stream of events and his death reveals all the hidden answers for the future. More precisely, after his death a new life-cycle of the sandworms begins afresh, while this three millenia and a half stasis helped the human race to avoid an extremely possible self-destructive temporal course and gave birth to the Scattering, a large diaspora of Imperial citizens which didn’t accept his rule or the policy of Bene Gesserit that made him possible, and represented the seeds of a future guaranteed non-monopolarity of the Universe. Similarly, in the real world the foundations of the new capitalist system were deepened through the colonization of Americas.

I can risk even a comparison between the gravitational force of Christianity - which still echoes even in the most civilized countries - and the endless reign of Leto II. Maybe that the both reigns were necessary in their dimension, both having the same logical consequences:1) the stability and the continuity of the elements glued together due to the coercive factors, and 2) the chance for a new and stronger life to be disclosed afterwards, in the scattering of the peels.

In Dune, the tyranny played the role of the peel, the peel that covered the cosmic egg of the humankind.

Back to Dune

Panik - Du schweigst (Lyrics), punk music

2014-02-24T22:00:00.001+02:00

Back to stage

Despre educatie

2014-02-22T15:52:00.001+02:00

Despre educatie

Probabil ca ar fi preferabil sa incep cu unele axiome care, paradoxal, nu au legatura directa cu postarea de mai jos, desi, conform declaratiei din titlu, chiar ar trebui sa tratez despre educatie.

'Nu incerca sa te lasi te fumat daca nu esti in stare sa-ti pastrezi ipseitatea sau daca, de fapt, nu vrei s-o faci! Poate ca preferi sa fumezi iarba, ceea ce este cu totul altceva.

Nu incerca sa iei apararea unei clase sociale pe care o consideri in mod arbitrar ca fiind defavorizata pentru ca s-ar putea sa constati ca aceasta fie nu are nevoie de ajutorul tau, fie nu mai este de multa vreme defavorizata, fie, desi este defavorizata, nu se percepe pe ea insasi ca fiind astfel, ceea ce inseamna ca efortul tau nu va fi apreciat.'

Astea ar fi doar cateva exemple, ca sa nu ne doara capul prea mult de la prea multa psihanaliza.

Multa vreme am fost intrigat de unul dintre aspectele ontologice si psihologice, cu inerentele implicatii soteriologice, ale doctrinelor dharmice, in special ale Mimamsei-Vedanta, cu privire la 'compozitia' Samcita-Karmei, adica a asa-zisei karme actualizate. Metafizicienii vedantini tin sa precizeze ca Samcita-Karma nu se reduce la corpul nostru fizic si la tipul de experienta existentiala pe care o avem, i.e: sanatate, evenimentele care ne compun viata, dar practic karma actualizata se extinde asupra tuturor aspectelor vietilor noastre, determinand natura persoanelor cu care interactionam, modul de raportare a acestora fata de noi, ba chiar si asupra universului fizic exterior - un anumit tip de karma va determina trairea in anumite conditii furnizate de natura. Karma devine astfel sinonima cu totalitatea experientei noastre mundane, si probabil ca insusi faptul ca eu scriu aceste randuri este o consecinta a karmei mele personale, care mi-a pus la dispozitie anumiti determinanti ce au condus la prezentul articol.

Nu am fost nicio data adeptul subculturii manelistice, ci dimpotriva. De asemenea, nu am dezvoltat relatii tocmai amicale cu colegii cantaretilor anterior mentionati, insa pot sa spun ca traind intr-un mediu in care ei lipsesc, sau in care cel putin manifestarea audibila a muzicii lor este inexistenta, mi-am dat seama ca poluarea sonora si culturala pe care acestia o provocau facuse parte din compozitia karmei mele, a experientei mele de pana atunci, iar neasteptata simpatie retrospectiva fata de oameni, niciodata fata de muzica lor, nu se datoreaza faptului ca acum sunt in masura sa analizez la rece evenimentele trecutului, ci unei realitati pe cat de universale, pe atat de grave.

Experientele noastre ne contamineaza intr-atat incat incetam sa mai stim ceea ce ne place si ceea ce nu ne place, sau pana la punctul in care incepem sa ne diversificam gusturile fara voia noastra. Co-prezenta manelistilor (sau a cowboy-lor ori a fundamentalistilor religiosi, acestea sunt doar exemple, pana la urma) devine necesara pentru a ne delimita de ei, pentru a ne mai putea considera superiori fata de altceva, insa, in acelasi timp, ne obisnuieste in a fi expusi acestei contaminari culturale in fiecare zi, si incepem sa apreciem unele elemente ale acestei subculturi.

Nu este cazul meu, dar se poate intampla in cazul celor mai saraci cu duhul, si este un aspect aproape incontrolabil: este asemenea muzicii dintr-o celula, care este oferita detinutilor special pentru a-i tortura, insa le este oferita in fiecare zi. Unele dintre modalitatile aparent paradoxale de adaptare este identificarea cu agresorul, desi de cele mai multe ori acesta nu este scopul explicit al tortionarilor. Temnicerii - sau pivnicerii, dupa cum preferati - doresc fie sa te distruga - ceea ce nu este total strain de intentiile celor care asculta manele - fie sa te reeduce, sa-ti distruga sistemul de valori.

Cu totii stim ca a doua copilarie nu este batranetea, ci inchisoarea. Daca cineva are impresia ca nu mai poate fi reeducat, atunci se inseala categoric. Nu vorbesc despre a fi invatat, ci a fi reeducat, adica despre acel proces prin care ti se imprima pattern-uri de comportament, gandire si simtire si prin care iti este (re)structurata personalitatea. Vorbesc despre educatie, insa despre educatia fortata a adultului. Este clar ca daca stai prea mult aproape de foc risti sa te arzi. Oricum, puteti sa faceti si voi experimentul asta undeva, in inima naturii, cu prietenii vostri, in fata unui foc de tabara, incat sa determinati diferenta dintre caldura si agresiune termica, dintre placere si basici.

Cum spuneam, daca cineva, ajuns intr-un mediu aseptic, constata ca ii lipseste ceva care nu ar trebui sa-i lipseasca, inseamna ca acel ceva incepuse deja sa lucreze asupra personalitatii proprii, remodeland-o. Insa nu toate reeducarile sunt dezirabile. ATUNCI CAND VOI DORI SA FIU INCARCERAT LA PITESTI, DE EXEMPLU, O SA-MI EXPRIM DORINTA AUTORITATILOR!

Este dificil sa trasezi granita dintre contaminarea culturala si delimitarea condescendenta, pedagogica. Daca mediul cultural devine mult prea poluat se poate ajunge in situatia ca delimitarea sa nu mai fi sincera, ci doar un mod mofturos de ati refuza doctoria.

De aceea toate initiativele anti-subculturale, anti-manelistice sunt bine-venite, in ceea ce ma priveste. Eu cred ca pericolul pe termen mediu si lung al acestui gen de muzica este subestimat si nu poate fi tratat independent de oamenii care il promoveaza si il consuma.

Dubla negaţie ontologică

2014-01-06T23:41:00.000+02:00

Noaptea se lăsă încet în cimitir,
cortină neguroasă căzută dintre stele,
privirea-mi le contemplă, părând că le atinge,
însă distanţa-i uriaşă ca proximul nadir.

Eu merg pe aleea pietruită, pierdut în negre gânduri,
ştiind cum că iubirea mi-e confinată între ziduri
pe vecie, în dureros de adânca glie,
închisă în a morţii vecinică robie.

Nici nu-i mai caut locul, ştiindu-l pe de rost,
nici nu mă rog la ceruri, căci voia nu mi s-a întors,
ci mi-aş dori un singur lucru, ca preţ de un minut
brahmaic să mă odihnesc alături de trupul neîntors.

Şi chiar atunci, acolo, lângă-al ei mormânt,
se auziră şoapte, purtate-n sus de vânt,
silabe, îmbinate în cuvinte tot mai lungi,
formară fraze transmiţând mesaje, rugi:
“Bogdane, priveşte către mine, eu lângă tine sunt,
ascute-ţi iar vederea, dorinţa eu ţi-o port!”

“Dar unde-mi eşti, iubire, căci nefiinţă simt,
mormântu-mi stă în faţă şi în răceala morţii eşti!”
“Bogdane, eu n-am murit aievea şi nu mint,
cum poţi muri, ca suflet, când de-a pururi vieţuieşti?”

“Eşti o nălucă, aşadar, şi nu fiinţă vie, din argilă,
ivită să mă bântui pentru fapta-mi din trecut!
”Bogdane, tu ştii mai bine, chiar, ce mi-ai făcut
când mi-ai zdrobit speranţa fără pic de milă
şi m-ai trimis să stau, indefinit, în aşteptarea ta,
căci dincolo de viaţă subzistă doară legea ta,
şi aceasta-ţi este dragostea!”

“Să înţeleg că m-ai iertat pentru ceea ce-am făcut atunci?”
răspunsei eu, căzând greu în genunchi.
“Eu te-am iertat, dar pe mine cine-o să mă absolve
de anomia morţii, ce-i mai vie decât viaţa?
Cine-o să-mi suprime chinul, cel dincolo de vorbe,
căci moartea morţii-ţi este doar iubirea!
De aceea îţi aşteptam de atâta timp venirea!”

“Dar ce pot eu să fac pentru a-ţi curma simţirea
când pragurile firii ne-au despărţit definitiv iubirea?”
”Tu poţi să mori, Bogdane, mori din nou!
Tu poţi să mi te alături, moartea-n doi e viaţă!
Sfărâmă, aşadar, această forţă hoaţă
Şi-n vecie ne vom întâlni din nou!“

Nici nu ştiu cât a trecut de atunci,
secunde să fi fost, la fel de bine ar fi fost şi ani,
ştiu doar că din noaptea aceea am renăscut uşor,
fiind expiat de vină lângă-al meu amor.

Sirenia - Glades of summer

Black Veil Brides - New Religion

2013-04-07T16:00:00.000+03:00

The Odyssey of spirit is eternal

2013-03-15T22:26:00.001+02:00

Tiamat- So much for suicide

Heaven on Earth

2013-03-03T15:57:00.000+02:00

If heaven is somewhere on earth,

Then I think that I just had seen, through a glimpse,

A little part from it, stretching to the sky-blue seas,

A place where everything could come into being using your will,

And seagulls fly freely between windmills bathed in sun beams,

While humans are acting as angels, in a frame that defies the real.

For that moment I was undeniably sure,

That heaven is really a place on earth,

And skies are always open through a clouds-cutted path,

A place where a noble scent is the most powerful lure,

And everything human becomes heavenly pure.

From that moment, above the space and above the time,

The whole truth received a meaning for me,

That heaven is the main instance of "to be".

Ego

2013-03-03T15:50:00.000+02:00

The existence of the ego is the reason for to be,

I know it from those books of ancient wisdom,

But to find it by your own should be harder, maybe,

'cos this means to truly understand your mental kingdom

of thoughts and emotions, that made your mind,

And elevate yourself to the human level,

This being a place in the realm of senses

That isn't good, but neither evil,

Just one small step into one of the Universes

Where your existence reaches a land

Opened to new worldly experiences,

And helps your mind in becoming pure gold.

Still, could be desirable that, discovering your conscience,

To behave yourself in a selfish way, blindly following your wishes,

Like an animal which wants just to conquer pleasures,

Ignoring in this manner your very own essence?

Isn't a poetical question what I said

Because humans use to listen only their holy-damn ego,

Becoming more dangerous than the animals of prey, I am afraid,

Knowing that our minds were given to us for a noble purpose, it's good to see,

And not for a transitory earthly satisfaction we were meant to be.

Against her tomb

2013-02-15T16:56:00.001+02:00

Now I look to my last sundown,
Moon and Hesperus on the blue they loom,
Once again my thoughts are dominated by my core
And I don't want to love her anymore!

It's my life's obsession which denies to be exorcised,
Compulsion of my senses which brought to me this madness
of my mind and of my perception, indeed,
This passion which is really a soul illness,
But I hope that in my grave she will follow me no more
'cause refuge I wish to find in eternal forgetfulness
And not in the least, to be only an extension
For the life which seems to me so barren without love,
Perfect psychoanalysis with null remission,
Medicine, but with an overdosed poison,
Death is an undeniable remedy
For the one which has been just disgusted by his life.

But to believe that she will shares my feelings
It was so childish for my part, a foolish fantasy,
Because pure love is only a myth, now I see,
And to earn her love
I should to erase all my life until now,
To wash-up all my past and one cerebral hemisphere,
To heal my wounds, to bend my spinal cord
And in the end to use, probably, the same easily pill.

My DeviantArt account

Graveyard

2013-02-15T16:50:00.001+02:00

When I came to the cemetery
The moon was on the sky,
The heavens were blood red fiery,
And the mourning of wind let me know
That all I wished were there, below.
All the nature was still silent, in its quiet sleep,
But I could hear the morning weep
Of the ravens which just wanted to dig
In the heart of soil, with their claws so big,
Or maybe it was just my impression,
Born by a mind which is so wild,
That even a bird could be a devil's child,
Merging into a sepulchral obsession,
Which followed me since the beginning of night,
When I started to think at the lovers fate,
And I tormented my mind until it became late,
And, then, I found out that I was right,
That nightmares sometimes could become facts,
When the rooted ones come out from their stones...
But this image just can not stand in my eyes,
'cause ravens aren't gravediggers, are birds.

Thus, sitting there, on that tomb,
I heard that the whispers become clear,
And voices were addressed to me, what a thrill!
Stoned by rapture, death was my will.

The stream of love

2013-02-15T16:31:00.000+02:00

Internetstructure

Swimming in a sea of liquid feelings,
I could reach you until the time ends,
I know that hoping isn't so silly
If every day your picture fills my mind,
And wishing to meet you someday
Becomes a desire for the other land.

The life is too short for thinking in patterns from the start,
But only being himself somebody may satisfy his heart,
At least your feelings know in each time how to act,
Not making the differences so big for taking apart
The fates which from the beginning were made to interact,
This is the main logic which leads humankind,
Nothing scientific, just emotions kept in your mind.

A starlit sky it is shared over the seas,
Where the same landscape delights the eyes of your soul mate,
Just bringing this frame from your dreams
And you will reach him through the power of fate

Delivered to time and space thanks to a will from above
You must break your mortal nature using your soul,
Cos just trusting a human may become one with the Love,
Fulfilling his life with the noble feeling as goal.

2012-12-02T22:39:00.001+02:00

Nirvana - Lake of fire

She was called Tiamat

2012-02-29T00:35:00.000+02:00

Tiamat -
The Pentagram

Ragnaroek

2011-12-20T18:36:00.002+02:00

Atunci când se părea că timpul din mers s-a oprit

Şi că în lume nu mai este loc pentru-un apoi,

Din ceruri veniră oştiri multe, infernal buluc,

Caleşti regale şi inorogi cu coamele de foc,

Mânaţi în jos de călăreţii cu părul lor vâlvoi,

Dorind să se alăture Elei-n cotidianul său cules.

Pe mendrele oxigenate ale cerului de jos

Şi pe paletele sticloase ale lui Bifroest,

Se iviră, înspumate, formaţiile oştirilor din Asgard,

Săgeţile divine se împlântară în solul din Midgard,

Şi curcubeul tremură, al naturii cauzal protest,

În faţa armatei furibunde conduse de colos!

Iar Thorr, răcnind ca Shiva, îşi agita arma-n eter,

Riscând să spargă norii cu barda lui de fier

Şi să ne aducă nouă ninsoarea cea din urmă,

Ravagii supra-pământeşti divina furie iscă,

Un pisc de munte, să fi fost av stål,

Se prăbuşi în neanturi din înnoratu-i piedestal!

Şi însuşi Odhinn apăru din slăvi,

Ştiind că astăzi sfârşitul iminent va fi,

Întreaga armadă a stirpei nobiliare

Se coborî din ceruri, mortificând totul în cale!

Din nord, dinspre gheţarii ce-i credem eterni,

Se adunară forme hâde, abisale,

Ei erau luptătorii, cei din Nifelheimul tern,

Veniţi să ucidă satele vasale,

Ce atâta amar de vreme le aduseră tribut

Vieţile umane, născute doar din lut.

Din sud, simţirăm trepidaţii colosale,

Ce ne anunţară venirea uriaşilor Jotuni

Conduşi de Thrym, decis că din străbuni

Pământul nu mai avusese confruntări reale.

Iar oamenii, aflaţi la mijloc între puterile zeieşti,

Îşi pregăteau sfârşitul în ceaţa dimineţii reci,

Ştiind că lupta, când e dusă între forţe inegale,

Nu poate avea decât efecte eroice fatale!

Un nou început?

2011-12-20T18:35:00.001+02:00

Fulgi grei de omăt din cer coborau,
Căzând pe pământ, o pătură moale lăsau,
În aerul rece, păsări de vară zburau,
Vestind moartea iernii, în zenit cântau.

Un linţoliu reavăn pământul primea,
Nevoia vieţii de ritul funest o cerea,
Copacii de zahăr, din crengi se aplecau,
Un ultim omagiu iernii, umili, aduceau.

Iubita-mi rămase pierdută-n pădure,
Departe de mine, ascunsă-mi cu zile,
Strigam după ea, plângând-o amar ca să vie,
Nevrând ca moartea s-o ascundă sub glie,
Ştiind că astfel risca-voi să o pierd pe vecie.

Ecoul ilar mă-ntrista cu cruzime,
Iar gerul aspru speranţa-o tăia,
Ducându-mi simţirea pe culmi de mâhnire,
Văzând cum iarna, geloasă, mi-o lua.

Am mers în zone troienite din timp,
Capacane puse de-un tragic destin
Ce nu mi-a dorit dreptul divin
Să fiu cu ea în al vieţii Olimp.

Fulgii impasibili, în structuri de sicriu,
Dansau pe cerul devenit pământiu,
Crepusculul serii natura o învelea
În folia nopţii ce iar revenea,
Dornică, parcă, să ascundă ruşinea
Zilei ce moartea iubite-mi dădea.

Ontologia lui Quine şi noua abordare epistemologică

2011-09-16T12:46:00.010+03:00

În celebrul său articol, “Două dogme ale empirismului”, Quine, filosoful analitic american contemporan, făcea referire la un moment dat, în capitolul “Empirismul fără dogme”, la aşa-numita “textură ierarhizată a realităţii”.
Există, conform lui Quine, mai multe niveluri de realitate, unele mai palpabile şi mai obiective, altele având un grad de realitate mai mic. Clasificarea lui Quine pornea de la distincţia dintre enunţurile analitice şi cele sintetice, însă avea să alunece, în acest ultim capitol al articolului, într-o analiză de filosofia ştiinţei, mai apropiată de metafizică şi de ştiinţa modernă decât de filosofia limbajului. Ideea centrală expusă de Quine era aceea a negării unei distincţii nete între enunţurile analitice, independente de experienţă, însă având însuşirea de a o norma, şi cele sintetice, extrase din experienţă. De ce? Pentru că limbajul dă seama de realitate, el fiind construit ca un instrument care să simplifice înţelegerea şi raportarea la lume a oamenilor, şi, implicit, enunţuri total analitice, aşa-zisele enunţurile analitice a priori, cum le numea Kant, unele care să normeze realitatea, dar care să nu depindă în existenţa lor de lumea asupra căreia se aplică, practic, nu există deoarece toate enunţurile au fost creeate ca rezultat al existenţei unei lumi a subiecţilor vorbitori.

Mai exact, în ontologia lui Quine, există mai multe nivele ale realităţii: la exterior se află lumea fizică, mai la interior enunţurile empirice, bazate pe experienţă, deci pe contactele subiecţilor cunoscători şi vorbitori cu această lume fizică, iar în zonele centrale, enunţurile a căror legătură cu realitatea este cea mai scăzută. Experienţa este ceea ce contează şi nu conceptul de lume. Quine foloseşte o metaforă în care lumea este descrisă în termeni eminamente subiectivi sau psihologici, adică prin valorizarea experienţei subiecţilor şi nu a unei lumi sui generis şi exterioare acestora. Mai exact, realitatea este o structură asemeni unui câmp de forţe ale cărei surse sunt reprezentate de ceea ce noi numim experienţă fizică şi al cărei conţinut este dat de enunţuri, mai mult sau mai puţin legate de această experienţă. Enunţurile cele mai periferice sunt acelea care se află în relaţia cea mai strânsă cu experienţa, ele sunt enunţurile empirice aparţinând geografiei, istoriei sau cele care relatează experienţa noastră cotidiană obişnuită. Mai la interior se vor găsi enunţuri aflate în relaţii din ce în ce mai distante cu experienţa concretă, pentru ca nucleul dur al ontologiei lui Quine să fie constituit de enunţurile matematicii, fizicii pure şi ale logicii, enunţuri extrem de generale şi de puţin legate de experienţă, iar asta în pofida caracterului lor normativ, şi nu descriptiv. Legile fizicii reglează, se poate afirma în spirit kantian, condiţiile oricărei experienţe, în general, definind concepte pure precum cauzalitatea, spaţiul, timpul, şi având, prin urmare, o legătură mult mai discretă cu experienţa decât o au enunţurile extrase direct din experienţă sau performate pe baza materialului oferit de aceasta. Legile logicii, în schimb, ating un nivel şi mai mare de detaşare de experienţă reglând condiţiile oricărei gândiri ale unei fiinţe senzoriale, în general.

În pofida aparenţei de independenţă a acestor legi se pune întrebarea dacă ele ar mai fi existat, ca legi, dacă nu ar fi fost cineva care să le gândească? Ele au fost descoperite sau au fost inventate? Descartes consideră că ideile înnăscute, în primul rând aceea de Dumnezeu, sunt, per se, argumente ale existenţei lui Dumnezeu. Eu nu aş ajunge cu raţionamentul până acolo, ci m-aş opri la mijlocul lui: dubito, ergo cogito, cogito, ergo sum. Cred că faptul că gândim, că se gândeşte la astfel de legi, este o probă a existenţei unor subiecţi gânditori şi care ajung să conştientizeze că gândesc pe baza experienţei lor. Ăsta şi este scopul lui Quine: discuţia fiind una de tip epistemologic dusă la extrem prin aceea că se pune accentul pe cunoaştere şi pe experienţă, ca mod al cunoaşterii. Aceasta primează faţă de existenţa unor obiecte ale cunoaşterii, a unui mediu al cunoaşterii care este, în ultimă instanţă, un obiect de cunoscut, la rândul lui, şi chiar faţă de existenţa unor subiecţi cunoscători. Ceea ce contează este evidenţierea caracterului cardinal al experienţei. Distincţia epistemologică dintre subiectul cunoscător şi obiectul de cunoscut este în bună măsură abolită rămânând numai subiectul, însă acesta este raportat la experienţa pe care el o are, nu neapărat la obiectele pe care le investighează în cunoaşterea lui. Cum aşa? Pentru că experienţa este concepută ca un construct mental, concreteţea ei variind în funcţie de adaptabilitatea sau de congruenţa ei faţă de pattern-urile noastre mentale. Ca atare, undeva în cadrul ontologiei lui Quine, ar trebui să-şi găsească locul şi fiinţele fantastice, de tipul zeilor lui Homer, doar faptul că până în prezent ei nu s-au potrivit niciuneia dintre experienţele noastre face ca aceştia să nu-şi găsească locul în spaţiul experienţei avute. Mai exact, Quine vrea să ne sugereze ideea potrivit căreia mintea este cea care creează realitatea, însă modul în care el ajunge la această concluzie este unul pozitivist şi ştiinţific, ca şi abordarea solipsistă a matematicianului Husserl, şi nu unul umanist şi intuitiv, ca în cazul metafizicilor orientale. Dacă doctrinele Orientului afirmă irealitatea lumii, pornindu-şi demersurile de pe poziţii spiritualiste şi spiritiste, Quine o face dintr-un super-pozitivism, acelaşi care, probabil, că l-a transformat pe Wittgenstein într-un mistic şi l-a făcut să insereze pasaje metafizice şi etice în Tractatus. Husserl miza pe modalitatea subiectivă de constituire a entităţilor matematice, ajungând să observe artificialitatea conceptelor de cantitate, de timp ori de spaţiu. La el, eul cunoştea lumea pe măsură ce o creea.

Quine pune în evidenţă relativitatea adevărurilor ştiinţifice, schimbarea paradigmelor din astronomie, din biologie sau din fizica atomică confirmând acest lucru. Mai mult, în modernitate se pune chiar problema, ne reaminteşte el, la renunţarea la unele dintre principiile logicii, principiul terţului exclus, pentru ca teoria corpuscul-undă din fizica cuantică să capete sens. Nu întâmplător, în logica speculativă, principiile logicii clasice au fost înlocuite cu principii care vin să infirme tot ce s-a gândit până acum.

Quine vrea să spună că omul este cel care-şi defineşte realitatea, pe toate nivelurile ei, în funcţie de contextele existenţiale cu care se confruntă la un moment dat, iar dacă ceva nu se adecvează experienţei, acel enunţ poate să fie ajustat în conformitate cu experienţa lui anterioară. La limită, nici enunţurile ştiinţelor celor mai generale şi mai abstracte nu vor face excepţie. Aceasta a fost maniera în care au fost construite primele concepte ale ştiinţei, atomul lui Democrit, iar astfel de concepte, din punct de vedere epistemologic, al cunoaşterii, nu sunt mai adevărate decât zeii lui Homer. Diferenţa rezidă în aceea ca atomul a fost necesar ca postulat al fizicii pentru a înţelege experienţa, în vreme ce zeii lui Homer au avut o utilitate mai redusă şi mai îndepărtată în timp. Însă, până la inventarea microscopului, şi chiar şi după aceea, atât zeii Olimpului cât şi atomii lui Democrit au avut acelaşi grad de consistenţă. Ultimele descoperiri din fizică, după cum am fi spus, eventual, la vremea scrierii articolului, vin să infirme chiar şi realitatea atomului sau a ideei de cărămidă a materiei, de element ireductibil al lumii fizice. Quine avansează teza diferenţei de grad, şi nu de natură, dintre diversele niveluri ale realităţii, evidenţiind, totodată, forţa minţii şi a limbajului. Punctul arhimedian pare să fie omul, esenţa lui. Tehnic vorbind, epistemologic, sau psihogenetic, ca în metafizicile hinduse, nefiind nicio diferenţă între obiectele fizice, inclusiv între propriile noastre corpuri şi fiinţe imaginare precum centaurii. Diferenţele survin numai la nivel pragmatic, ultimele nu servesc înţelegerii realităţii sau raportării oamenilor faţă de mediu ori unii faţă de alţii.

Într-adevăr, nevroza este mai practică decât psihoza, însă ideea este perfect valabilă, având o consecvenţă logică perfectă.

Concluzia ar fi aceea ca tot ceea ce ne înconjoară este rezultatul gândirii în comun, al gândirii individuale şi a celei colective, iar lumea ar putea să fie cu totul altfel decât credem noi că este, sau să fie chiar o iluzie, aşa cum mi se sugerează în filme ca Matrix, ori în filosofiile orientale, fapt care ar confirma statuarea lui Quine potrivit căreia omul este agentul activ şi modelator al cunoaşterii şi, prin aceasta, într-o măsură nedeterminată până acum, al lumii şi, mai cu seamă, că accentul noumenal trebuie găsit tot acolo, în om. Întâietatea valorică a cunoaşterii e atât de pronunţat subliniată de Quine încât discursurile care ţin de astrofizică, metafizică sau teologie cad în plan secundar. Epistemologia, ca teorie modernă a cunoaşterii, este interesată de metoda cunoaşterii, şi nu atât de conţinutul ei. Astfel, între mitologeme şi teoreme se pare că există o diferenţă mult mai mică decât am fi tentaţi să credem la prima vedere, asta ca să mă situez în registrul lexical al prezentului. Ideile care se transmit de la un individ la altul, atât diacronic, cât şi în cadrul aceleiaşi generaţii, produc, la limită, poate chiar realitatea aşa cum o ştim noi, acestea nefiind doar nişte comportamente copiate, ci substanţiind realitatea însăşi. Asta este şi situaţia memelor, despre care discutasem cu un amic, care funcţionează pe baza oportunităţii sau a eligibilităţii ori a dezirabilităţii comportamentelor conţinute de ele. Memele religioase sunt foarte practice din punct de vedere adaptativ şi al confortului psihic, la fel cum obiectele care ne formează experienţa şi pe care ni le-am postulat singuri ca date incontestabile ale realităţii şi care formează limita materială a realităţii, în vreme ce teoremele reprezintă polul ei teoretic, sunt foarte practice din punct de vedere ştiinţific. Ce poate să fie mai real decât un obiect fizic? Însă ambele au aceeaşi sursă, sunt întreţinute şi transmise de existenţa creatoare a fiinţei umane.
Poate că risc să cad într-un idealism subiectiv, ca cel al lui Berkeley, care spunea că este posibil ca întreagă lume să fie iluzorie şi că doar Dumnezeu s-o menţină în existenţă, cu diferenţa că idealismul meu nu recurge la apelul la divinitate. Dacă, la un moment dat, anumite modificări cu rol de adaptare ar trebui făcute în cadrul eşafodajului nostru teoretic despre lume bazat pe experienţă, atunci poate că, într-adevăr, lumea aşa cum o ştim noi ar înceta să mai existe. De altfel, Rudolph Steiner vorbise la un moment dat despre posibilitatea ca paradigma heliocentrică să fie înlocuită, la rândul ei. Ceea ce spune Quine, dar o făcuse şi Husserl în alţi termeni, seamănă izbitor de mult cu doctrina co-producerilor condiţionate din buddhism. Lumea este menţinută în existenţă de o serie de fiinţe aflate pe aceeaşi treaptă de vibraţie, având niveluri comparabile de ignoranţă. Iar Kamaloka, lumea simţurilor, este continentul fenomenal în care se găsesc oameni, animale şi plante deopotrivă. Ceea ce înseamnă ca diferenţele inter-specifice şi inter-regnuri nu sunt suficient de mari încât să se poată spune despre oameni că sunt radical diferiţi de restul regnului organic. Doctrina co-producerilor condiţionate spune tocmai că asemănarea în privinţa ignoranţei sau a anatomiei mistice ori metafizice reprezentate de sattva, rajas, tamas face ca universul fenomenal, în unul sau altul dintre domeniile sau aspectele lui, să capete o formă şi nu o alta. Ar fi necesar, prin urmare, ca omul, care se diferenţiază de restul naturii cunoscute prin gândire, percepţiile fiind comune întregului regn simţitor, să realizeze unele ajustări notabile la graniţele experienţei şi ale realităţii lui, astfel încât obiectele fizice să nu mai fie explicaţii convenabile ale realităţii prezente. Quine spunea că obiectele fizice, ca rezultate ale schemei conceptuale a ştiinţei, sunt nişte intermediari utilizaţi pentru a prezice viitorul în lumina experienţei trecute. Adică sunt elemente de continuitate. Ele sunt substitutele noastre de Realitate. Însă dacă omul ar opera sus-numitele ajustări ale experienţei dobândind, eventual, o altă raportare faţă de timp, atunci poate ceea ce noi, ca specie, am co-produce condiţionat ar începe să difere radical de ceea ce am produs împreună până acum şi n-am mai recurge, bunăoară, la obiectele fizice. Atunci poate că nivelul universului fenomenal la care am avea acces nu ar mai ţine de Kamaloka şi de simţire, iar teza lui Quine şi-ar găsi o confirmare exemplară.

Back to top

Artificiul teoretic cartezian din "Meditaţiile Metafizice"

2011-09-14T14:11:00.003+03:00

Intenţia metodei reducţioniste a lui Descartes ar trebui să fie înţeleasă la întreaga ei dimensiune metafizică şi ştiinţifică. Îndoiala metodologică generalizată la scala întregii realităţi psiho-senzoriale are drept obiectiv tocmai relevarea esseitatii sinelui ca res cogitans, deci abilitarea doctrinei fiinţării unei substanţe sau a unui lucru ireductibil(e), dar demonstrabil(e) pe calea raţionamentelor oricărui intelect sănătos şi obiectiv. De fapt, reducţia generalizată eşuează şi tocmai de aceea ea constituie unul dintre cele mai mari victorii ale gândirii ştiinţifice. Eşuează întrucât metoda reducerii la absurd sau a negării hiperbolizate la nivel universal nu poate să vizeze şi domeniul minţii subiectului gânditor, adică al celui care realizează reducţia, în calitatea lui de instrument al acestui demers inferenţial. Reducţia nu este auto-referenţială. Orice artificiu epideictic, adică cu valoare demonstrativă, ar fi inserat în calcul concluzia rămânerii minţii, ca realitate ultimă şi incontestabilă, îşi păstrează valabilitatea atemporală, asemeni minţii înseşi.

Contemporanul lui Cartesius, Leibniz, avea să afirme că monadele, în înţelesul lor de esenţe imateriale ale tuturor fiinţelor universale, cunosc doar determinaţii sau calităţi de ordin calitativ, nu şi unele de ordin cantitativ. Or, obiectele lipsite de extensibilitate sau de spaţialitate nici nu au cum să interacţioneze într-un mod fizic şi real, ci doar într-o manieră ideală, singura formă de interactivitate care ar salva teza leibniziană a quiddităţii monadelor. Însă acest gen de concepţie încetează să mai fie una filosofică sau teosofică, şi devine una metafizică, cu implicaţii în ştiinţa modernă, în particular în fizica cuantică, dar şi, posibil, în astrofizică şi în cosmologie.

Oricum, concepţia monadologică a lui Leibniz porneşte de la presupoziţia existenţei spiritului, ceea ce nu este atât de rău din punct de vedere logic având în vedere maniera de a raţiona a filosofului din Stuttgart. Unitatea este una dintre autologiile divinităţii creştine, şi, având în vedere identitatea eidetică sau esenţială dintre Creator şi creatură, dintre natura naturans şi natura naturata, stabilirea acestei presupoziţii metafizice se dovedeşte cât se poate de adecvată.

Cum spuneam, mintea, care nu trebuie gândită însă în materialitatea ei, adică nu trebuie identificată cu suportul ei biologic, ci trebuie înţeleasă ca o funcţie, independentă de materie, deşi manifestabila doar prin intermediul acesteia, ca şi divinitatea, de altfel, este rezultatul obţinut atunci când toate elementele reducţioniste au fost aplicate realităţii, actul gândirii fiind singura realitate non-negabilă şi, de aici, “existentă” în sensul suveran al cuvântului.

Ceea ce este mai puţin ştiut, deşi nu posedă o importanţă metafizică şi filosofică deosebită, este faptul că în lucrarea sa, Meditaţii Metafizice, Descartes îşi rafinează metoda reducţionistă introducând şi condiţia existenţei unui geniu rău, ca factor perturbator adiţional în încercarea subiectului cogitativ de a determina temelia ultimă a existenţei.

Altfel spus, nici dacă toate impresiile, emoţiile şi gândurile determinate în subiectul gânditor de existenţa unei realităţi fizice inconsistente se demonstrează ca fiind ireale, sau măcar sunt supuse beneficiului îndoielii, nu avem o justificare convingătoare a necesităţii efective- şi nu doar pur demonstrative- a eliminării lor prin reducţie metodologică. Este adevărat că raportul cel mai intim îl avem cu propriile noastre minţi, dar asta nu înseamnă cu necesitate că tot ceea ce este diferit de minţile noastre nu există. Ar fi o formă de solipsism, până la urmă, care ar avea o valoare metodologică, nu neapărat şi una metafizică sau teologică. Aici Descartes a urmărit să pună accentul pe prioritatea minţii faţă de materia fizică, a actului faţă de potenţă, a formei faţă de materie.

Prin urmare, Cartesius introduce condiţia existenţei unei entităţi raţionale separate, în primul rând pentru accentuarea ideii pluralităţii eurilor gânditoare, iar în al doilea rând, şi cel mai important, pentru a găsi o explicaţie, oricât de retorică ar fi aceasta, în privinţa mecanismului care ar face posibilă existenţa a ceva virtual inexistent.

Dacă partea imaterială a creaţiei este singura care există de fapt, atunci avem nevoie de explicaţii de ordin ştiinţific sau pseudo-ştiinţific care să abiliteze stabilitatea ontologică a ceva care aparţine, mai degrabă, de domeniul nefiinţei. Dacă, ulterior, Berkeley avea să apeleze la teza unei permanenţe a materiei induse de către divinitate, Descartes foloseşte teoria geniului omnipotent şi malefic, un fel de demizeu gnostic, care generează constanta iluzie a realităţii. Astfel, geniul rău din Meditaţiile carteziene devine replica parţial gnostică a lui Lucifer, ca personificare a lumii fizice.

Astfel, geniul rău cartezian trebuie înţeles, mai degrabă, ca fiind o figură de stil cu aplicaţie ştiinţifică, ca o tentativă de a reitera esseitatea incontestabilă a minţii chiar şi în condiţiile unei pluralităţi de euri gânditoare, care constituie o caracteristică a res extensa, fiind o determinaţie cantitativă, euri având diferite grade de raportare la realitate, cât şi, mai ales, în condiţiile existenţei unei ignoranţe extrem de puternice, duale, de natură să oculteze corecta înţelegere de sine însuşi a omului. Cu alte cuvinte, obstrucţionările aflate în calea cunoaşterii naturii reale a fiinţei umane pot să fie atât strict materiale, cât şi spirituale, fapt posibil prin interacţiunile dintre diverşii subiecţi gânditori.

Wednesday, September 14, 2011

back to top

Metallica - Unforgiven 1 + Lyrics

2011-02-04T21:50:00.001+02:00

2011-02-04T00:23:00.002+02:00

Farmer boys- Barnburner