Philosophy allows the
unveiling of what is
covered by custom
“Philosophy is the
possibility of human
transcendence”. M.L.A.
Aranha and M.H.P.
Martins1
To know the usefulness
of the philosophical
aspect of Spiritism, it
is first necessary to
keep in mind the meaning
of the word
“reflection”, which
comes from the Latin “reflectere”,
and etymologically
means: “to make one go
back, to retreat”.
Therefore, to reflect is
to resume one's thought,
to think about what has
already been thought, to
return to oneself and to
question what is already
known...
In the 17th century,
Renato Descartes, the
French philosopher and
mathematician, already
presented this method,
now known as
“Cartesianism”, through
which he stated: “to
reach the truth, it is
necessary, once in a
lifetime, to get rid of
all opinions that
received and reconstruct
the foundations, all the
systems of our
knowledge”.
Such a method led him –
by intuition and
deduction – to discover
the truth of his
existence as well as of
God’s.
According to Gramsci,
“one cannot think of any
man who is not also a
philosopher, who does
not think, precisely
because thinking is
proper to man as such”.
The Friendly Spirits2 clarify
that “in thought, man
enjoys unlimited
freedom, since there is
no way to tie him down.
You can stop its flight,
but not annihilate it...
To constrain men to act
in disagreement with
their way of thinking is
to make them
hypocritical. Freedom in
the realm of conscience
is one of the
characteristics of true
civilization and
progress.”
Therefore, there is no
doubt that freedom of
thought is everyone's
right. To curtail it
would be to produce
hypocrites, as is often
the case with forced
conversions. Thus, we
can arrive to the
conclusion that
philosophy is the
beloved daughter of
thought and it is born
at the moment when
thinking is called into
question, becoming an
object of reflection.
The common person, in
everyday life, is led to
“stop” from time
to time, in a necessary
“staccato”, in
order to recover the
meaning of his acts and
thoughts, and at that
time he is asked to
reflect. However,
simple reflection does
not generate Philosophy,
but philosophical
reflection. In turn,
philosophical reflection
unfolds at three
levels: radical,
rigorous and overall.
Let us interpret these
three topics with
Professor Dermeval
Saviani:
Radical –
the Latin word “radix,
radicis” means “root”,
and in the figurative
sense, “foundation,
base”.
Therefore, philosophy is
radical but not
inflexible (in this case
it would be
anti-philosophy).
However, as it seeks to
make explicit the
fundamental concepts
used in all fields of
thought and action.
Rigorous –
While the “philosophy
of life” does not
take the conclusions to
their ultimate
consequences, and is not
always able to examine
their foundations, the
philosopher must have a method clearly
explained in order to
proceed with rigor,
guaranteeing coherence
and the exercise of
criticism. Even because
the philosopher does not
just make statements, he
needs to justify them
with arguments. To do
so, he uses rigorous
language, which
avoids amphibology, that
is, avoids the ambiguity
or duplicity of meaning
of everyday expressions
and allows him to
discuss with other
philosophers from
clearly defined
concepts. That is why
the philosopher always “invents
concepts”, or
creates new expressions
and neologisms, or
alters and specifies the
meaning of the usual
words.
Overall –
While the sciences are
particular, because they
approach “cuttings”
of reality and are
distinguished from other
forms of knowledge, and
human action is
expressed in the most
varied ways, philosophy
is globalizing,
because it examines
problems from the
perspective of the
whole, relating the
different aspects to
each other. In this
sense and in addition to
considering that the
object of philosophy is everything (because
nothing escapes its
interest) we conclude
that philosophy aims at
the whole, at totality.
Hence, the
interdisciplinary
function of philosophy,
establishing the link
between the various
forms of human knowledge
and action.
The way in which
philosophical reflection
is rigorously carried
out varies according to
the philosopher's
orientation and the
historical trends
arising from the
situation experienced by
men in their action on
the world.
At this point, we can
ask, “Where is the
need for philosophy?”
Therefore, there is no
doubt that freedom of
thought is everyone's
right. To curtail it
would be to produce
hypocrites, as is often
the case with forced
conversions. Therefore,
we can conclude that
philosophy is the
beloved daughter of
thought and it is born
at the moment when
thinking is called into
question, becoming an
object of reflection.
The common person, in
everyday life, is led to
“stop” from time to
time, in a necessary
“staccato”, in order to
recover the meaning of
his acts and thoughts,
and at that time, he is
asked to reflect.
However, simple
reflection does not
generate Philosophy, but
philosophical
reflection. In turn,
philosophical reflection
unfolds at three levels:
radical, rigorous and
overall.
Let us interpret these
three topics with
Professor Dermeval
Saviani:
Radical –
the Latin word “radix,
radicis” means “root”,
and in the figurative
sense, “foundation,
base”.
Therefore, philosophy is
radical, however, not
rigid (in this case it
would be
anti-philosophy), but
insofar as it seeks to
make explicit the
fundamental concepts
used in all fields of
thought and action.
Rigorous –
While the “philosophy of
life” does not take the
conclusions to their
ultimate consequences,
and is not always able
to examine their
foundations, the
philosopher must have a
method clearly explained
in order to proceed with
rigor, guaranteeing
coherence and
consistency. Critical
exercise. Even because
the philosopher does not
just make statements, he
needs to justify them
with arguments. To do
so, he uses rigorous
language, which avoids
amphibology, that is,
avoids the ambiguity or
duplicity of meaning of
everyday expressions and
allows him to discuss
with other philosophers
from clearly defined
concepts. That is why
the philosopher always
“invents concepts”, or
creates new expressions
and neologisms, or
alters and specifies the
meaning of the usual
words.
Overall –
While the sciences are
particular, because they
approach “cuttings” of
reality and are
distinguished from other
forms of knowledge, and
human action is
expressed in the most
varied ways, philosophy
is globalizing, because
it examines problems
from the perspective of
the whole, relating the
different aspects to
each other. In this
sense, in addition to
considering that, the
object of philosophy is
everything (because
nothing escapes its
interest); we conclude
that philosophy aims at
the whole, at totality.
Hence, the
interdisciplinary
function of philosophy,
establishing the link
between the various
forms of human knowledge
and action.
The way in which
philosophical reflection
is rigorously carried
out varies according to
the philosopher's
orientation and the
historical trends
arising from the
situation experienced by
men in their action on
the world.
At this point, we can
ask, “Where is the need
for philosophy?”
Experts on the subject1 are
unanimous in stating
that the usefulness and
even the necessity of
philosophy are anchored
in the fact that, through
reflection, it allows
man to have more than
one dimension, in
addition to that given
by acting immediately,
in which the “practical
man” is
incarcerated.
Philosophy provides the
distance to evaluate the
foundations of human
acts and the purposes
for which they are
intended; it brings
together the fragmented
thought of science and
reconstructs it in its
unity; it returns to
action pulverized in
time and seeks to
understand it.
Therefore, philosophy is
the possibility of
human transcendence,
i. e., the ability that
only man has to overcome
the given and unchosen
situation. Through
transcendence, man
appears as a being of
project, capable of
freedom and of building
his destiny.
Paradoxical as it may
seem, distance is
precisely what brings
man closer to life.
Whitehead, a
contemporary British
logician and
mathematician, said “the
function of reason is to
promote the art of life”.
Philosophy recovers the
process lost in the
immobility of things
done (dead because
already outdated).
Philosophy prevents
stagnation. Therefore,
philosophizing always
confronts power,
and its investigation is
not alien to ethics and
politics.
The philosophy
historian, François
Châtelet, states, when
he writes “as long as
there was a State – from
the Greek city to
contemporary
bureaucracies – the idea
oftruth
has always turned,
finally, to the side of
the powers (or has been
recovered by them as
witness (for example)
the evolution of French
thought from the 18th to
the 19th century).
Therefore, the specific
contribution of
philosophy – placing
itself at the service of
freedom, of all freedoms
- is to undermine
through its analysis and
the actions it
unleashes, Whether it is
a matter of science, of
teaching, translation,
research, medicine, the
family, the police, the
prison fact,
bureaucratic systems.
What matters is to make
the mask appear, move
it, rip it off...”
Philosophy is,
therefore, the critique
of ideology, as an
illusory form of
knowledge that seeks to
maintain privileges.
Paying attention to the
etymology of the Greek
word corresponding to
truth (a-létheia,
aletheúein, “to lay
bare”), we see that
truth is to lay bare what
was hidden, and therein
lies the vocation of the
philosopher: the
unveiling of what is
veiled by custom, by
convention, by power...
Finally, philosophy
requires courage.
Philosophizing is not a
purely intellectual
exercise. Discovering
the truth means having
the courage to face the
stagnant forms of power
that try to maintain the
“status quo”, it
means accepting the
challenge of change. (This
is not easy, given
ancient human
accommodation.)
Socrates and Jesus faced
- imperturbably and
fearlessly - the
ultimate challenge of
death in defense of the
truth they postulated.
We can now understand
why Allan Kardec chose
Philosophy to be one of
the three main vertices
of Spiritism. And we
understand this even
more when we observe
that Philosophy does not
encourage either
suffocating dogmatism or
skepticism, the latter
being a philosophical
position that concludes
by the impossibility of
knowledge, either in the
moderate form of
provisional suspension
of judgment, or in the
radical refusal to
formulate any
conclusion.
At the other extreme of
skepticism is dogmatism,
according to which the
philosopher considers
himself in possession of
absolute and indubitable
certainties and truths.
While the dogmatist
clings to the certainty
of a doctrine, the
skeptic concludes by the
impossibility of all
certainty and, in this
sense, considers the
search that leads
nowhere to be useless.
Comparing the two
antagonistic positions,
we can see that they
have in common the
immobility vision of the
world: the dogmatic
reaches a certainty and
remains in it; the
skeptic craves certainty
and decides that it is
unattainable.
Nevertheless, philosophy
is movement, for the
world is movement.
Certainty and its
negation are just two
moments (the thesis and
the antithesis) that
will be overcome by the
synthesis, which, in
turn, will be a new
thesis and so on...
(Continued
in the next issue.)
|