Imagine a person who wakes up one day and finds himself walking along a long and seemingly endless road. Its situation is similar to the famous painting by German artist Caspar David Friedrich, famous for his painting “Traveler on the Sea of Mist”! Let us now imagine that this man has just come to his senses and begins to think about the circumstances that led him to this journey, and also the origin of the path he is now taking. Also, when he was fascinated. What he saw around him, he wondered what he saw and what he saw around him and around the road on both sides, of mountains and forests and valleys. While the journey can feel lonely and scary at times due to what he can see from the side bushes, or what he can find along the way, he enjoyed the ride! After getting tired, he sat leaning against a tree branch and wondered what the end of the road and the horizon hide.
Undoubtedly, this wanderer’s journey and his questions and obsessions are similar to those that summarize the epistemological concerns of philosophy. The question of origin, identity and destiny, or what we might call the tripartite movement of philosophical thought. There is no original philosopher, no philosophical current or system that has forgotten to reflect on these questions. Rather, the essence of the philosophical rule is at the heart of these three concerns. Let’s simplify this triple move here, albeit for the sake of brevity.
The problem of origin has occupied an important place in the history of philosophy, especially in Nietzsche’s modern philosophy, as it was related to the approach to the self, which is a genealogical approach that seeks to find the origin and formation of things. The theme of origin was dear to metaphysics and had a special aura around it. As origin, it refers to the beginning and the womb from which existence arose. As for Nietzsche, the issue is very different, he does not pose the problem of origin, but to overcome this aura, that is, to finally overcome metaphysics.
This hypothesis of origin was presented to many writers and thinkers in different connotations in the Nietzschean meaning, they formed certain ideas around it, which led them to present famous theses in the history of philosophy, among which we have mentioned, for example, The thesis . The theses of Feuerbach, and of Freud, and later of Karl Marx, “The origin of individual property and the class struggle”. Likewise, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, in his book “The Origin and Foundations of Inequality Among Men”, about the book “Without Conversation”. The Origin of Species by Charles Darwin.
Thus, the problem of origin seems to have existed in most thinkers, either explicitly or implicitly. Everything that can be said about man must be said on the assumption of a specific cultural or historical origin that man had before entering the stage of civilization, where this origin formed the main characteristics that will appear later.
If the problem of origin was discussed in the past, or philosophy was considered as part of metaphysics, then the large number of delicate disciplines created by modern science led to the discussion of the question of the origin of the universe and of life. Experimental scientific theme. It is true that important parts of this theme are still obscure, which raises philosophical and melancholy questions. However, the matter has been clarified in most of its dimensions, limited by the theory accepted by many scientists, that is, the big bang theory, which every day becomes more precise and clear due to the revisions and additions that are made. made to it by scientists from around the world.
This, of course, does not mean that the question of public and private existence has been resolved.
Second: the present
If thinking about the question of origin has often led philosophy to overcome reality, it has become, as it was called, the ancient science of “first principles of causes and existence”, it did not fail to emphasize that it can play. both on the ropes. Because the Greeks perceive it as a form of knowledge and at the same time a way of life. In this sense, philosophy will focus its attention on reality, it is about diagnosing the phenomena of the living world. Since its origin, philosophy has always walked on two legs, it is knowledge and theoretical problems, but it is also a virtue and a wise way of living in the world. However, the passing of the years transforms his destiny by limiting himself to the solution of theoretical problems instead of his lifelong interest in painting. So eventually it will become an academic paper.
This seems to have been the case with scholastic philosophy, which for centuries was mired in questions of image, essence, essence, representation, etc., and the academic character was reinforced by the philosophy of the Enlightenment, especially Kant and Hegel. The question, then, is what philosophy can do to live life. Karl Marx was one of those who – as is well known – opposed this excessively theoretical character and emphasized in his famous saying that the task of philosophy is not just to understand the world, but to work to change it. According to him, the essence of philosophy must be practice.
The very idea was championed by pragmatic philosophy. The task of philosophy is not to find an absolute truth that transcends reality, but to find solutions to real-life problems. With William James and John Dewey, philosophy would become a tool dedicated not to solving metaphysical problems, but to finding practical solutions that truly benefit man. As a result, there is no single truth that applies to all cases, but the fact remains linked to the cultural and civilizational context in which we operate. Pragmatists were among the first thinkers to open philosophy to difference and pluralism, before the emergence of the philosophy of difference.
Thinking about the present does not mean limiting oneself to a narrow and limited view of current situations. Philosophy is also to be able to lift up one’s eyes so that one can look sympathetically at the general destination to which all things are leading. He thinks not only of what he has seen (past/origin) or what he sees now (present), but also of what he still does not see or does not see (future destination).
The importance of Heidegger’s philosophy lies precisely at this point, in the blueberry’s ability to assert itself universal. Despite Hegel’s superiority over Heidegger in this matter, the latter continued to think specifically about the fate of Western history, while Hegel was able to trace the history of existence back to its beginnings in the East!
Fate is always there, on the open horizon of the future, even if its beginning is here in the present, or perhaps more deeply buried in the abyss of the past, but fate is the product of our decisions about what to do. with himself and with the common being.
Hegel conceived history with the view that everything happens in order and order, and leads to a great achievement, the dimensions and consequences of which are unknown. This is the final idea. In one way or another, Hegel was also a Stoic.
While there is much more than us to make sure our fate does not rest entirely on our shoulders, humans will continue to be responsible for fateful decisions to come, such as energy transition, population planning, limiting global warming, or other topics. . Man cannot see himself as a hero or a superior man, nor can he be deceived by what he can provide today with technological equipment, whose temptations he must resist more often. Philosophy will continue to be basically the decision we make about where the compass of action should point, but we are not the only ones to make that decision, for this is Sartre’s thesis of absolute freedom. Today’s decision does not oblige us to do what we want, but what future generations, living beings, nature and the earth will want.
It’s a labyrinth of philosophy: thinking with a mind that turns the fan in three directions: seeing again/originating what you see. Change of perspective/view of the present. And finally the visible invisible/future destiny.
Source: Al Ittihad