Arquivo de philosophy | Page 104 of 123

“The object of this work is the investigation of the problem…”

“The object of this work is the investigation of the problem. But first, we must define the methods we will use in the analysis. However, we must first say what exactly we understand as a method. But first, we must outline the scope of human understanding. First of all, we need to make it very clear what the limitations of a scope are. Nevertheless, it is fundamental that we explain first in what sense we think something limited…” Oh, God, turn my boat off this course! Turn my poor boat off!

____________

Affability Is the Customary Packaging of Falsehood

“He is so cool, huh?” Oh, very very nice! Sweet! And the father of lies knows how much one gets from this venerable quality… But there it is: social relations require masks, and affability is the customary packaging of falsehood. I say and do not hesitate: sincerity looks terrible! For is it possible to have any appreciation of social life, knowing it to be a great theatre? Is it possible to smile in response to the smile whose motivation we know? Is it possible not to judge affability as an almost always detestable manifestation? Rhetorical questions, for the answers already count good centuries…

____________

Thought Only Blossoms in Silence

Thinking, intellectual progress is associated with silence. That is to say: it is impossible to think under noise; thought requires silence to flourish. And when we notice the numerous benefits of silence, solitude, and stillness, we must conclude that to adapt to silence is to strengthen character, to mold one’s own personality. The highest thoughts always spring from where there are no voices, and the inner voice only appears when the world is silent. That is why the path of knowledge is very clear—difficult is to have the courage to follow it.

____________

Intellectual Formation Requirements

Intellectual formation fundamentally requires two tasks: to study the great authors and to study authors with radically conflicting world views. In the beginning, the obvious: it is a matter of respect for one’s own intelligence to toast with the great ones. The classics must be read, studied, absorbed, and integrated into the personality of the intellectual. Then, with the base set, it is possible to aim for evolution. The next step is to transform the mind into a violent battlefield. The intellectual necessarily needs the conflict, the clash of ideas: only in this way is it possible to progress. To read conflicting authors is to understand the complexity of life, the variations in the mechanisms of perception, to recognize and accept the ambiguous. Moreover, talk to different minds, if sincerely, not only widens knowledge but also imposes humility, but opens up merits where people say they do not exist, in short, it magnifies. This is why it is necessary to deal with opposites, to abandon prejudices, to free oneself from the chains of thought. The opposite path is to repeat what is convenient, deny contradictions, and never evolve. To let ideas burst freely is to let them, by force, drag the mind to the intelligence.

____________