There are many wonderful philosophical ideas and problems that are well known and certainly unknown. One of the questions that attracted my interest was whether we have the problem of free will. I believed people with free will, the things I want to do are my choice and my choice. But after careful consideration and lecture, the belief in my free will was reversed. Is there a free will? Many people will say so, and of course some people think that free will is paradox and unbelievable. What does free mean? Do you have actions that can prove the existence of free will? All creatures are impulse. Can moths move freely in flames? "Spernosa compares the feelings of free will," Wil Durant said in "The Story of Philosophy." It is important to accept that the essential subjectivity of free will is to be recognized. People are convinced that their actions obey their decisions and impulses; he does not know that (internal or external) power drives him. In the case of his "in spite of himself" - in the case of obsessive-compulsive disorder - he can not say that he is exercising his free will Mr. Spinoza asserts that individuals have no free will and that everyone's behavior is an inevitable result. Spinoza believes that individuals can not avoid the future if fate is determined in advance. In the "minority report", the PreCrime club believes in sincerely that free will is an illusion. I believe that the crime prevention department can not avoid this fate once it proves that an individual was murdered. It is clear that the philosophy of free will of PreCrime department is very consistent with Spinoza. The movie starts with a prediction about the homicide near Precogs. Anderton responded immediately, and determined the exact location of the homicide. When the arrival time was important, it revealed that Precogs' prediction is true. Anderton ceased murder and this form of justice could be attributed to Precogs' certainty prediction

Looking at the history of metaphysics, what is the problem? It was answered in incomplete, dissatisfied or complicated ways, but Spinoza tried to answer this question in a special way by describing God and his nature. Based on Spinoza's point of view, the quality of God can be called an attribute, and its pattern is only the influence of matter. In this article I will explain in detail Spinoza 's important ontology, its attributes, and their common relationships that define God as the sole substance. Running Head: DESCARTES VS SPINOZA 1 Issue II: On the physical and mental relationship between Descartes and Spinoza Nicole Yang 20502251 PHIL 384 July 23, 2014 How do the different entities of the two dimensions interact? Human thought and unification of the body are persistent philosophical problems that have been sought since ancient Greece, and it is one of the major problems studied by Descartes and Spinoza. Descartes started this discourse at a rationalist school, and Spinoza later answered his work. In this article, we compare the views of Descartes and Spinoza about human thought and body relationship and keep Spinoza's assertion. Similarity Descartes and Spinoza have relatively little similarity between beliefs about the connection between the body and the mind. The first point determines the epistemological independence of the mind and the body Baruch Spinoza agrees with Descartes in its ethics that the problem can only be identified by its nature. However, he rejected Descartes' dualism. Spinoza objected to Descartes that thought and body had no influence on each other and were two attributes of the problem. Spinoza believes that the body and mind must not be substances different from each other because the substance definition requires that only a single substance exists. For him, God is everything, it's all. He is not a transitive, but an inner one

"The exact, complicated and subtle treatment of Spinoza's ideas, and the central problem of knowledge philosophy ... Della Loca advocates an explanation that may be the subject of Spinoza's discussion in the coming years.In general, Della Rocca showed that he is a primitive, subtle and often brilliant interpreter of Spinoza - - Nicholas Jolley of the University of California, San Diego "For Spinoza scholars, historians of general philosophy, advanced philosophical history, and those who are interested in early cognitive psychology, this will be a classical reading." This is one of the most exciting works in history The philosophy that I have been reading for a long time ... should be read most widely. "- Don Garrett of the University of Utah Spinoza's mind theory is totally representative mind theory. For Spinoza psychology is only representative content. In Ethics 2p7, he argues that "the order and connection of thinking is consistent with the order and connection of things", that is, parallel ideas exist for each extended objective. This is called parallel processing. From this point of view, Spinoza can develop his theory of mind: "The first thing that makes up the actual existence of human thought is only the concept of a single existing thing" (2 p 11) . Each heart is an idea that has its own object in itself - in the case of a human being, the mind is the thought of the body and everything that happens in the body is expressed in the mind (he discussed in 2 p 12 and 2 p 13 like) . The mind is a special idea representing a single object, the body in which it is parallel. (Please refer to Della Rocca 1996 for details on Spinoza's representative mind theory.) For Spinoza, the human body has extended attributes, human thought has attributes of thought and expression. Also, the mind and body may express the possibilities of reality in parallel, or the mind and body may be the same substance (substance) considered under different attributes. In the language Spinoza inherited from Descartes, the idea is an expression of ideas. This led to Spinoza's famous conclusion that the human heart is equivalent to the human mind. The parallelism of Spinoza also means that every change in the human body must accompany a change in human thought. "Everything that happens to the subject of thinking that constitutes human thought must be perceived by human thought, that is, if the object constitutes the human mind, the concept is the body, Nothing happens to the body that is not perceived in its mind (Part 2, Proposition 12).

Paper 2 First, consider the baseball scene specified under Leibniz's metaphysics system. In baseball scenes, the sum of the universe players, bats, coats, swings, and all other substances is a coincidence. Of course there are other possibilities, but there are other universes that may exist but not exist. Coincidence things, bats, athletes etc can not explain themselves. Leibniz is here to handle the principle of reason. Leibniz's view is sometimes ironic. Spinoza has infinite substances as well as substances. Leibniz called these substances as monads (Leibniz 1989). They are real substances (which can exist independently of other substances) and they are so simple that they can not interact in any way. However, each monad has complete information on the entire universe. Leibniz 's space can be reduced to (non - spatial) similarity, or correspondence between essential properties of the list. Leipzig 's teacher, Jacob Thomas, created a famous piece, Liberal Anonymrt Anilos, devoting her full effort to denying TTP and its potential naturalism. Leibniz also seems to believe that Spinoza's rights and legal views are more dangerous than Hobbes. Spinoza has fundamentally damaged the handling of rights and obligations even for nice lawyers with good hobbies and relatively unfavorable tastes like Lambert van Velthuysen (1622-1685) and Samuel Pufendorf (1632-1694) I believe. Sex Velthuysen argues that there is no sacred legislator, Spinoza's philosophy is "there is no room for command and commandment" (p. 42). Pufendorf considers it to be defective because it causes "moral effect" in the concept of Spinoza 's rights and does not put others under duty (Pufendorf 1934, 391).

Running Head: DESCARTES VS SPINOZA 1 Issue II: Relationship between Descartes and Spinoza's mind and body Nicole Yang 20502251 PHIL 384 July 23, 2014 DESCARTES VS SPINOZA 2 Introduction How do the two entities of different dimensions interact? Human thinking and unification of the body are persistent philosophical problems that have been sought since ancient Greece, and it is one of the main problems studied by Descartes and Spinoza. Descartes started this discourse at a rationalism school and Spinoza later answered his job. In this article, I compare contrast between Descartes and Spinoza 's views on human thought and physical relationship and keep Spinoza' s claim. Similarity Descartes and Spinoza have relatively little similarity between beliefs about physical and spiritual connections. The first point determines the epistemological independence of the mind and body. For Spinoza, the human body has extended attributes, human thought has attributes of thought and expression. Also, the mind and body may express the possibilities of reality in parallel, or the mind and body may be the same substance (substance) considered under different attributes. In the language Spinoza inherited from Descartes, the idea is an expression of ideas. This led to Spinoza's famous conclusion that the human heart is equivalent to the human mind. The parallelism of Spinoza also means that every change in the human body must accompany a change in human thought. "Everything that happens to the subject of thinking that constitutes human thought must be perceived by human thought, that is, if the object constitutes the human mind, the concept is the body, Nothing happens to the body that is not perceived in its mind (Part 2, Proposition 12).

Baruch de Spinoza later became known as Benedicus de Spinoza, a 17th century philosopher and he was very hostile as he gave up religious beliefs to God. This does not mean that Spinoza denied the existence of God, Spinoza believed that he believed in God, but in another, more natural sense. Spinoza was criticized for being accused of his belief in religious person's mind. His idea was revolutionary as opposed to the traditional Jewish religion, so he was expelled from the church by the Jewish community. Baruch Spinoza (1632-1677) Spinoza is a Jewish Dutch philosopher. He is a powerful rationalist who sees potential unity of the universe. He advocated the view that it is critical of religious scriptures, that there is sanctity among them, and despite apparent contradiction, the universe is still commanded. His philosophy influenced later philosophers, writers and romantic poets such as Shelly and Coleridge. Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) Emmanuel Kant is an influential German philosopher, whose "pure rational critique" ties the reasons and experiences into philosophical thought. Discussions between rationalists and empiricists have left. Kant's philosophy affects future German idealists and philosophers such as Shelling and Schopenhauer. For philosophers like Spinoza and Emmanuel Kant, "freedom of speech" means freedom of knowledge to participate mainly in exchange discussions opened. In 1784, five years before the French Revolution, Kant argued that "freedom to openly use their reasons" is a basic and equal right of everyone or citizen. Likewise, when Mill wrote "freedom" less than a century ago, he defended freedom of speech, defended the "Freedom of Thought and Discussion" as an individual and pursued the truth. To these thinkers, the freedom of equal isigoria is still essential, but their attention is not limited to actual remarks, ie participation in solving and discussing other physical actions, reasonable psychological exercises and ideas and arguments We will move on to the exchange of. , Often printing

In this article, I will study Spinoza's mind and body theory, first explain various interpretations of his mind and body theory, such as homosexuality, idealism, classicism, materialism and so on. From critical comments on these inappropriate explanations, Spinoza 's argument about mind - body relationships should be understood as a non - causal relationship between the mind and the body, and they have the same weight I will. Parallel interpretation is compatible with the above understanding, but traditional parallelization can not be attributed to Spinoza. His parallelism arises from his argument about identity between the mind and the body, and this assertion is based on his material monism and attribute binaryism. Therefore, we must understand Spinoza's mind and body theory as an identity theory. It leads to a parallel relationship between the mind and the body. Since the dual aspect theory coincides with the identity and parallelism between thinking and the body, Spinoza's theory should be attributed to a double aspect theory. Furthermore, as Spinoza maintains material monism and attribute dualism (assuming that thought and extended attributes are objectively seen, this is different), Spinoza's theory includes psychological events and physics There is identity between events. There is no identity between spiritual and physical attributes. Psychological and physical events are the same events described under psychological and physical attributes, respectively. From the discovery of identity in Spinoza 's individuals or events it is possible to think that his theory should also be understood as a symbolic identity theory, rather than discovering the identity of the attribute. Spinoza's mind theory is totally representative mind theory. For Spinoza psychology is only representative content. In Ethics 2p7, he argues that "the order and connection of thinking is consistent with the order and connection of things", that is, parallel ideas exist for each extended objective. This is called parallel processing. From this point of view, Spinoza can develop his theory of mind: "The first thing that makes up the actual existence of human thought is only the concept of a single existing thing" (2 p 11) . Each heart is an idea that has its own object in itself - in the case of a human being, the mind is the thought of the body and everything that happens in the body is expressed in the mind (he discussed in 2 p 12 and 2 p 13 like) . The mind is a special idea representing a single object, the body in which it is parallel. (Please refer to Della Rocca 1996 for details on Spinoza's representative mind theory.) In this article, I will study Spinoza's mind and body theory, first explain various interpretations of his mind and body theory, such as homosexuality, idealism, classicism, materialism and so on. From critical comments on these inappropriate explanations, Spinoza 's argument about mind - body relationships should be understood as a non - causal relationship between the mind and the body, and they have the same weight I will. Parallel interpretation is compatible with the above understanding, but traditional parallelization can not be attributed to Spinoza. His parallelism arises from his argument about identity between the mind and the body, and this assertion is based on his material monism and attribute binaryism. Therefore, we should understand Spinoza's mind and body theory as identity theory. It leads to a parallel relationship between the mind and the body. For Spinoza, the human body has extended attributes, human thought has attributes of thought and expression. Also, the mind and body may express the possibilities of reality in parallel, or the mind and body may be the same substance (substance) considered under different attributes. In the language Spinoza inherited from Descartes, the idea is an expression of ideas. This led to Spinoza's famous conclusion that the human heart is equivalent to the human mind. The

Running Head: DESCARTES VS SPINOZA 1 Issue II: Relationship between Descartes and Spinoza's mind and body Nicole Yang 20502251 PHIL 384 July 23, 2014 DESCARTES VS SPINOZA 2 Introduction How do the two entities of different dimensions interact? Human thinking and unification of the body are persistent philosophical problems that have been sought since ancient Greece, and it is one of the main problems studied by Descartes and Spinoza. Descartes started this discourse at a rationalism school and Spinoza later answered his job. In this article, I compare contrast between Descartes and Spinoza 's views on human thought and physical relationship and keep Spinoza' s claim. Similarity Descartes and Spinoza have relatively little similarity between beliefs about physical and spiritual connections. The first point determines the epistemological independence of the mind and body. For Spinoza, the human body has extended attributes, human thought has attributes of thought and expression. Also, the mind and body may express the possibilities of reality in parallel, or the mind and body may be the same substance (substance) considered under different attributes. In the language Spinoza inherited from Descartes, the idea is an expression of ideas. This led to Spinoza's famous conclusion that the human heart is equivalent to the human mind. The parallelism of Spinoza also means that every change in the human body must accompany a change in human thought. "Everything that happens to the subject of thinking that constitutes human thought must be perceived by human thought, that is, if the object constitutes the human mind, the concept is the body, Nothing happens to the body that is not perceived in its mind (Part 2, Proposition 12).

JSTOR is part of ITHAKA, a nonprofit organization that supports academic institutions to use digital technology to protect academic records and promote research and education in a sustainable way. © 2000-2018 ita ka. Copyright JSTOR®, JSTOR logo, JPASS®, and ITHAKA® are registered trademarks of ITHAKA. Artstor® is a registered trademark of Artstor Inc. ITHAKA is an authorized dealer of Artstor Inc. 2nd and 3rd Part II on Spinoza's ethics Part II: Spinoza's idea and epistemology Neven Knezevic Simon Fraser University nevenk@sfu.ca 7 summaries on Spinoza In the second half of the lecture, Spinoza's thought description and ethics of ethics and We will cover the second half of the survey. Like the previous lectures, we conduct a detailed investigation on a few propositions of the Code of Ethics and briefly introduce the main contents of this section. I will explain the relationship between Spinoza 's explanation of spiritualism and its rationalism, the foundation of his philosophy, his explanation of body movements, and how this approach is based on the understanding of the mind for the body. A description of Spinoza 's truth and error and sufficient and inappropriate thinking; three kinds of Spinoza knowledge; and his basic body of psycho - psychology related to part 3 Lecture on Part II and Part 3 of Spinoza's ethics: Part 2: Spinoza's thought and epistemology Spinoza's Code of Ethics is divided into five parts. The first two include metaphysics and discuss physical and mental relationships separately with God separately. In the first part, Spinoza regards God as infinite and unique material for all reality. Please note that the philosophical term "substance" used here refers to the whole that we can not directly experience. Some of Spinoza's contemporaries and some contemporary classmates believe that there are several substances. The most famous is that RenéDescartes (1596-1650) has two kinds of problems, thoughts and problems, each thinking it has its own idea and extension. He further insists that everyone is a kind of interaction combination between the two substances. In contrast, Spinoza is an infinite and comprehensive substance, not only because it is infinite, inclusive, but also creative, I think that there is only one substance equivalent to God. By doing this, Spinoza has defined the substance as "the substance itself, it is conceived by itself" (Ethics Part 1, Definition 3). In other words, a substance is part or an aspect of the essence of self-creation (Spennosha and Spinosism, Stewart Hampshire, 2005). In Spinoza's term, a substance is an active nature, or Natura naturans ("nature of parenting", or "the nature of nature") - he is therefore the same as God. In addition, because its definition includes the required existence, we can not deny that this entity exists. Since it is infinite and comprehensive, there can be only one substance

JSTOR is part of ITHAKA, a nonprofit organization that supports academic institutions to use digital technology to protect academic records and promote research and education in a sustainable way. © 2000-2018 ita ka. Copyright JSTOR®, JSTOR logo, JPASS®, and ITHAKA® are registered trademarks of ITHAKA. Artstor® is a registered trademark of Artstor Inc. ITHAKA is an authorized dealer of Artstor Inc. 2nd and 3rd Part II on Spinoza's ethics Part II: Spinoza's idea and epistemology Neven Knezevic Simon Fraser University nevenk@sfu.ca 7 summaries on Spinoza In the second half of the lecture, Spinoza's thought description and ethics of ethics and We will cover the second half of the survey. Like the previous lectures, we conduct a detailed investigation on a few propositions of the Code of Ethics and briefly introduce the main contents of this section. I will explain the relationship between Spinoza 's explanation of spiritualism and its rationalism, the foundation of his philosophy, his explanation of body movements, and how this approach is based on the understanding of the mind for the body. A description of Spinoza 's truth and error and sufficient and inappropriate thinking; three kinds of Spinoza knowledge; and his basic body of psycho - psychology related to part 3 Lecture on Part II and Part 3 of Spinoza's ethics: Part 2: Spinoza's idea and epistemology Spinoza's Code of Ethics is divided into five parts. The first two include metaphysics and discuss physical and mental relationships separately with God separately. In the first part, Spinoza regards God as infinite and unique material for all reality. Please note that the philosophical term "substance" used here refers to the whole that we can not directly experience. Some of Spinoza's contemporaries and some contemporary classmates believe that there are several substances. The most famous is that RenéDescartes (1596-1650) has two kinds of problems, thoughts and problems, each thinking it has its own idea and extension. He further insists that everyone is a kind of interaction combination between the two substances. In contrast, Spinoza is an infinite and comprehensive substance, not only because it is infinite, inclusive, but also creative, I think that there is only one substance equivalent to God. For Spinoza, body and mind are the same substance. Therefore, in an ontology, thinking and body are the same thing, the same reality or entity. I can not separate my mind and body, and vice versa. "Because the body is the object of the soul, the mind is tied to the body," he said (Ethics 2, 21). However, this does not mean that one party determines the other party or affects the other party. They are different attributes of basic reality. Because they are essentially related, not cause and effect, we can not say that one person decides another person. Spinoza said: "The body can not decide thought thinking, and it can not decide that the body exercises or rests" (Ethics 3, 2). This is illogical, even if it is said that one person decides another person because everyone is acting simultaneously with the other person.

In his ethical work Spinoza spent some time focusing on the essence of emotion. Spinoza's first concern is passive emotion. It is based on inappropriate ideas, not appropriate ideas. Please explain how easy it is for a human being to be driven in a particular direction by a certain passion. Spinoza not only explains these emotions but also wants to show the benefits of human emotions. In Baruch de Spinoza's Ethical Book 4, known as "the bondage of humans, or the power of emotion", the purpose of Spinoza seems to be to explain the role of feelings in human nature. To achieve this goal, he said that a "perfect" human model must be established. Before Plato's Republic, we saw the goal of using perfection: building a perfect city will reveal the soul of man. However, the meaning of the word "perfection" is expected to differ among these thinkers that are far apart. Plato's perfect concept is an integral part of his "formalism", but Spinoza originally used Aristotle's concept. He first defined that it was done in the way the manufacturer expected. This quickly reminds me of the objective principle that I am trying to achieve the ultimate goal. In his ethical work Spinoza spent some time focusing on the essence of emotion. Spinoza's first concern is passive emotion. It is based on inappropriate ideas, not appropriate ideas. Please explain how easy it is for a human being to be driven in a particular direction by a certain passion. - Passion and rationality of Hamlet As in literature passion and reason are often conflicted in life, sometimes people make bad decisions. William · Shakespeare often used this confrontation as the basis of his drama. In the tragedy of Shakespeare, when it comes to the death of a loved one, passion and reason are often conflicting. The passion of the character makes him or her a tragic flaw. Shakespearean play "Hamlet" is no exception

Spinoza's mind theory is totally representative mind theory. For Spinoza psychology is only representative content. In Ethics 2p7, he argues that "the order and connection of thinking is consistent with the order and connection of things", that is, parallel ideas exist for each extended objective. This is called parallel processing. From this point of view, Spinoza can develop his theory of mind: "The first thing that makes up the actual existence of human thought is only the concept of a single existing thing" (2 p 11) . Each heart is an idea that has its own object in itself - in the case of a human being, the mind is the thought of the body and everything that happens in the body is expressed in the mind (he discussed in 2 p 12 and 2 p 13 like) . The mind is a special idea representing a single object, the body in which it is parallel. (Please refer to Della Rocca 1996 for details on Spinoza's representative mind theory.) In this article, I will study Spinoza's mind and body theory, first explain various interpretations of his mind and body theory, such as homosexuality, idealism, classicism, materialism and so on. From critical comments on these inappropriate explanations, Spinoza 's argument about mind - body relationships should be understood as a non - causal relationship between the mind and the body, and they have the same weight I will. Parallel interpretation is compatible with the above understanding, but traditional parallelization can not be attributed to Spinoza. His parallelism arises from his argument about identity between the mind and the body, and this assertion is based on his material monism and attribute binaryism. Therefore, we should understand Spinoza's mind and body theory as identity theory. It leads to a parallel relationship between the mind and the body. For Spinoza, the human body has extended attributes, human thought has attributes of thought and expression. Also, the mind and body may express the possibilities of reality in parallel, or the mind and body may be the same substance (substance) considered under different attributes. In the language Spinoza inherited from Descartes, the idea is an expression of ideas. This led to Spinoza's famous conclusion that the human heart is equivalent to the human mind. The parallelism of Spinoza also means that every change in the human body must accompany a change in human thought. "Everything that happens to the subject of thinking that constitutes human thought must be perceived by human thought, that is, if the object constitutes the human mind, the concept is the body, Nothing happens to the body that is not perceived in its mind (Part 2, Proposition 12).

In meditation 6 entitled "The existence of material things and the real distinction between the body and the mind" In Meditation 6, the important thing Descartes explores is the relationship between the body and the mind. Descartes believes that the mind and body are separate, they are two different substances. He believes this is a clear and obvious truth, and that it is a Cartesian true knowledge quality. On the other hand, I do not agree that the mind and body are separate and the mind can exist without body. Running Head: DESCARTES VS SPINOZA 1 Issue II: On the physical and mental relationship between Descartes and Spinoza Nicole Yang 20502251 PHIL 384 July 23, 2014 How do the different entities of the two dimensions interact? Human thought and unification of the body are persistent philosophical problems that have been sought since ancient Greece, and it is one of the major problems studied by Descartes and Spinoza. Descartes started this discourse at a rationalist school, and Spinoza later answered his work. In this article, we compare the views of Descartes and Spinoza about human thought and body relationship and keep Spinoza's assertion. Similarity Descartes and Spinoza have relatively little similarity between beliefs about the connection between the body and the mind. The first point determines the epistemological independence of the mind and the body The dualism of Descartes' mind and matter means the concept of humanity. According to Descartes, humans are a complex existence of thought and body. Descartes prioritizes the mind and thinks that the mind can exist without the body but the body can not exist without the mind. In meditation, Descartes believes that although the mind is a substance, the body consists only of "accidents". However, he believes that the mind and body are closely related. Nature tells me through pain, hunger, thirst, etc. Together, I will form a unit with the body. I will not feel pain even if my body is hurt, but I will only be perceived by intelligence just as a crew sees something broken on his ship. Descartes' view of the mind and body problems is called interaction. He said that the mind and body communicate with each other without mutual exchange. He insists that Meditation 6, the relationship between body and mind is not similar to the relationship between pilot and ship. This relationship has no intimate relationship. According to him he says that our relationship with our soul and body is not such a type as our relationship with our soul and body is too intimate. "The pineal gland is also known as the pineal gland, a small endocrine gland in the brain of a vertebrate, a small endocrine gland in the brain of a vertebrate It is an effect that affects the adjustment of the awakening / sleep mode It produces a certain melatonin, and the light cycle of the hormone (seasonal function, it seems like a small pine cone, located near the center of the brain, between the two hemispheres hidden in the two circular thalamids It is shaped.

Over the years, many scientists and philosophers have believed that humans are composed of physical and mental (Radner, 1971). Some of them believe that the mind is different from the body, and each of them has no interaction under their own influence (Radner, 1971). Another point of view is that the body and the mind act together as a whole and the result is human. Great figures like Greek philosophers Aristotle and Ladner (1971) have always held this view. Running Head: DESCARTES VS SPINOZA 1 Issue II: On the physical and mental relationship between Descartes and Spinoza Nicole Yang 20502251 PHIL 384 July 23, 2014 How do the different entities of the two dimensions interact? Human thought and unification of the body are persistent philosophical problems that have been sought since ancient Greece, and it is one of the major problems studied by Descartes and Spinoza. Descartes started this discourse at a rationalist school, and Spinoza later answered his work. In this article, we compare the views of Descartes and Spinoza about human thought and body relationship and keep Spinoza's assertion. Similarity Descartes and Spinoza have relatively little similarity between beliefs about the connection between the body and the mind. The first point determines the epistemological independence of the mind and the body The dualism of Descartes' mind and matter means the concept of humanity. According to Descartes, humans are a complex existence of thought and body. Descartes prioritizes the mind and thinks that the mind can exist without the body but the body can not exist without the mind. In meditation, Descartes believes that although the mind is a substance, the body consists only of "accidents". However, he believes that the mind and body are closely related. Nature tells me through pain, hunger, thirst, etc. Together, I will form a unit with the body. I will not feel pain even if my body is hurt, but I will only be perceived by intelligence just as a crew sees something broken on his ship. Descartes' view of the mind and body problems is called interaction. He said that the mind and body communicate with each other without mutual exchange. He insists that Meditation 6, the relationship between body and mind is not similar to the relationship between pilot and ship. This relationship has no intimate relationship. According to him he says that our relationship with our soul and body is not such a type as our relationship with our soul and body is too intimate. "The pineal gland is also known as the pineal gland, a small endocrine gland in the brain of a vertebrate, a small endocrine gland in the brain of a vertebrate It is an effect that affects the adjustment of the awakening / sleep mode It produces a certain melatonin, and the light cycle of the hormone (seasonal function, it seems like a small pine cone, located near the center of the brain, between the two hemispheres hidden in the two circular thalamids It is shaped.

What is memory and how does it work? Memory and conceptualization seems to play a role in perceptual and behavioral services. Conceptualization is the encoding of a pattern that allows physical interaction with the 3D world. These patterns are limited by environmental structure, body structure and memory. Therefore, how we imagine looking at the environment depends on the type of body we have. There is no connection to such memories. Instead, how the concepts become related (and what it means to be related to) is how the individual behavior patterns combine, taking into account the constraints of our bodies It depends on. What we call humans includes an extended body and a series of physical thinking (human mind). The body is constrained by the causal law of the physical world. As determined by the idea so far, the two causal chains are parallel to each other. In fact, Spinoza generally insists that the order and connection of things is the same as the order and connection of ideas. Evidence is worth prudent research, since the parallel processing argument is dominant in the second part. The mode of thinking is the idea of ​​"formal reality" which is their existence. However, the idea has content or "objective reality". Because the reality of formal thinking is embedded in the chain of necessary causes, its objective reality is also determined by linkage. Because Spinoza already mentioned in axiom 4 that "knowledge of effect depends on knowledge of cause and contains it" in the first part. For Spinoza, the human body has extended attributes, human thought has attributes of thought and expression. In addition, it can be said that the mind and body expresses the possibilities of reality in parallel, or the same substance (substance) that the mind and body were considered under different attributes. In the language Spinoza inherited from Descartes, the idea is an expression of ideas. This meant that Spinoza reached his famous conclusion that the human mind is equivalent to the human mind. The parallelism of Spinoza also means that every change in the human body must accompany a change in human thought. "Things that make up the concept of human thought must be perceived by human thought.If the object constitutes the human mind, the concept is a physical body, and what is not perceived by the mind is the body Nothing happens "(Part 2, Proposition 12) Remember that there is only one substance. Body and mind are the same individual and are considered under different attributes. This has several effects. The first is that "the subject of thought that constitutes human thought is the body, in other words, it is on extension line of existence, not something else." In other words, perception is the human body. As mentioned above, all our thoughts are regulated by our body condition. When we perceive something, such as red spots and ice cream taste, it is our body's change that we feel. (II, 22) In Part 1, the concept of effect includes the concept of reason, so the concept of ice cream taste (effect) includes the idea of ​​ice cream and our body I will. However, this type of mediation through the body introduces ideological constraints (this constraint will not be destroyed before the fifth part)

For a long time philosophers have intensely discussed the classification of philosophical epistemology into two categories: rationalism and empiricism. We believe that empiricism can acquire knowledge only by observing facts or by experimenting, but rationalism gains knowledge through logical reasoning. Rationalism and empiricism are themselves a very viable way of thinking in philosophy, but the arguments of these philosophical schools become more powerful when combined. Empiricalism is an excellent position in discussions of empiricism and rationalism. Renedecart supports rationalism. That is acquiring knowledge by reason. David Hume supports empiricism and knowledge after experience through experience. Both positions have strong debate. Descartes warns that "something is genuine, I do not understand it is such thing." Descartes believes that it is necessary to "assure that rationality is used for everything" in order to obtain true knowledge. Hume, on the other hand, believes that the connection of ideas is our knowledge. He explains this empirical approach, using three principles of relationship between ideas, ie similarity, time or place continuity, causality. Hume believes that we associate these ideas in our mind with the ideas we gained through experience. Essay.com/a Thesis using direct citation of Hume and Descartes to demonstrate positivism against rationalism Rationalism is often contrasted with empiricism. In fact, these views are not mutually exclusive. For example, the philosophy of science is rational and empirical. But knowledge is basically based on experience if you think that the end of the experience comes from experience through five external senses or through inner feelings like pain and happiness. Similarly, some plausible versions argue that starting from the basic principle like geometric axioms, all possible global knowledge can be deduced derived. The philosophers who discussed this point are Spinoza and Leibniz, and efforts to solve epistemological and metaphysical problems raised by Descartes brought about the development of a subjective approach to rationality. Spinoza and Leibnitz believe that, in principle, at least all knowledge including scientific knowledge can be obtained only by rationality.

That is the idea of ​​the Spinnock style of Descartes' judgment. Abstract; Some of Spinoza's critics believe that the idea of ​​Spinonozia is a judgment. As Spinoza is interpreted as responding to Descartes' ideological theory, he considers Spinosian thought to be a Cartesian judgment rather than Cartesian thought, so I call this view a common interpretation. The most obvious difference between Descartes and Spinoza is that descartes considers thinking passive, but Spinoza thinks the opposite is true. A: For clarity, I have never mentioned Descartes linguistics I did. Cover It is related to Descartes (and sometimes influenced by it), but it is often proposed by Descartes critics. Strictly speaking, there is no Cartesian linguistics. As discussed in CL, although the use of the term "concept" of Descartes is not entirely clear, he seems to be using it extensively, so the language expression usually consists of individual It is not a concept but an idea. It is within range. If so, then the language will belong to the concept of his natural tendency - and it is difficult to see how the attributes he mentioned in his language reference are obtained. I want to know what Descartes meant when I talked about his important introduction. As background, I discovered an important part of the Cartesian heritage; Descartes doubts - casts doubt on everything you know. In today's world, this idea seems to be very old-fashioned. We tend to question everything up to the point of skepticism. For Descartes, doubt is the opposite of reason. Descartes' suspicion has made scientific progress possible over the past 200 years. The medieval society believed that humans existed because God wants them to exist. Descartes does not doubt the existence of God, I doubt that the existence of man is God's desire. He has a problem because he proved the existence of God using a series of theorems. He proved that thought is the essence of thinking Discussions in Spinosian language are related to God rather than humans, but the discussion of Descartes is related to humans from Spinoza's point of view. From there build and summarize most of his evidence. Descartes' view on will and intelligence is supported by very reasonable evidence, "I think this is something like". When the will is limited to understanding, I think that Spinoza appears and confidently and clearly confident that things are definite until destroying it with his will, wisdom and essential deductive conclusion I will. I now believe that there are substances with infinite attributes. Each represents an eternal essence.

Benedict Spinoza, a genius student and social shame philosopher, said "People are social animals" (Kaplan 278). Whether recognized or not, desire for social acceptance is part of human culture. People have longed for it, obsessed with it, and changed himself to get it. Humans may not succeed in trying to reach the social position they believe when they examine their lives. Because the superficial reasons for clothing and faction are different, we refuse to accept it. However, because of the personality of talent, it was also denied. Laurence J. Coleman first adapted the social shame theory of Erving Goffman (1963) to a talented child. Laurence J. Coleman and Tracy L. Cross further detail the shame of talented theory in a book called "Gifts in Schools" widely cited in the field of talented education. In the "Giving Gifts" chapter, the authors extended the theory originally proposed in the 1988 article. According to Google Scholar, this article has been cited at least 110 times in academic literature. In the theory of social embarrassment of Goffman, shame is a property, action or reputation that loses trust from society in a particular way: it is not welcome It leads people rejected by rejected stereotypes Spiritual classification of others It is not an ordinary fixed idea that is accepted. . A famous sociologist, Gofman, defines shame as a special gap between virtual social identity and real social identity. Supplementation His "social identity" depends on these expectations that we have and has turned them into prescriptive expectations. Formally requested

One way to prove this is the Cartesian triangle theory, which says that the triangle has three sides, but his feelings are not to say that he has three sides. Instead, his wisdom and knowledge tells him that there are three sides in triangle, it means that triangles exist, and that is a clear and unique perception. By linking this with God, we can say that God is like our senses without conveying our intelligence and knowledge, not the existing triangles. By linking this with the real world, he pointed out that Descartes clearly and clearly recognizes that the body occupies material or occupies space. Just as we can know the nature of material things (wax), we can understand the nature of God by pondering our concepts. We can know the essence of God. But does God exist? We understand that God has "objective" reality as our purpose of thinking. But does God also have formal reality? Yes, according to trademark. God exists. In addition to "objective" reality, God has formal reality. That is the conclusion. What is the argument? Thinkers focus on questions about causality. What is the reason for thinking about my god? According to the opinion of thinkers, it is self-evident that, as a general rule, "among the effective and comprehensive causes, there must be at least as many reality as the cause of the cause" (40). This is explained by Cottingham as the principle of causality. If we find a clock, the reason for that clock must be at least as complex as the clock. The same thing can be said if we find the blueprint for that watch. In subsequent propositions, Spinoza discussed several aspects of the causal relationship of God. The most important thing is to distinguish God in two respects. From the nature of God, Spinoza can say something directly. In this sense, God is the reason for "approximation". However, the essence is not enough for limited existing ones. The essence of Peter 's individual is not necessarily the existence of Peter. Conversely, the existence of a finite one leads to the existence of other finite ones. But since everything is in God, then God must be considered as their cause. The essence of God requires his existence. God's "existence can no longer be separated from the essence of God, but it has three equal angles that can be separated from the essence of the triangle" (46). Integrity must exist by definition, as the nature of God includes his totipotency, totipotency, totipotency and infinite integrity. Therefore, the following three logic is correct. The concept of God is the concept that it exists completely.

In 1644, Descartes published "Philosophical Principles" that summarized his physics and metaphysics. He dedicated this work to Elizabeth Stewart who developed him and his moral philosophy, Princess Elizabeth (1618-79), the daughter of the Queen of Bohemia. Descartes believes that mankind is an alliance ... Descartes' philosophical principle (1644; philosophical principle). This shows a deep understanding of the Cartesian system. Spinoza generally accepted Descartes 'physics but he rejected Descartes' metaphysics and opposed the three features: the transcendence of God, the spiritual concept of "spiritual substance" is quite different from substance (Mind - body dualism ). ... Metaphysical mathematical bias of methodological theory and meditation in the human behavior in "Philosophical Principle" (1644) and "Passion of the soul" (1649), and rule of direction of dominant mind (1701) Philosophy (1642) But it is Descartes' meditation is the pursuit of 'first principle' of philosophy. In order for the meditator to understand the principles of philosophy, meditators must decide that they believe they are true and they will never be wrong in their own mind . Therefore, Descartes is using "a suspicious method" as "a sensation-oriented picture trying to abandon criticism of the world critical to the meditator". By using the four phases, Descartes' method can not question any more, please quit your senses to make sure that later it was realy . The philosophical principle (Latin: Principia Philosophia) is a book by René Descartes. Essentially, it is the integration of the first philosophical approach and meditative discourse. Written in Latin, it was published in 1644. It is devoted to Bohemian Elizabeth and has longstanding friendship with Descartes. The French version (Les Principes de la Philosophie) was published in 1647. It explains the principle of nature - the law of physics - as Descartes sees. Most notably, it proposes the principle that the motion of an object is uniform and straight when there is no external force. Newton borrowed this principle from Descartes into his own Principia; to this day it is still known as the Newton's first movement law. This book is primarily intended to replace the course of Aristotle used in the then university of France and the UK. ... Descartes' philosophical principle (1644; philosophical principle). This shows a deep understanding of the Cartesian system. Spinoza generally accepted Descartes 'physics but he rejected Descartes' metaphysics and opposed the three features: the transcendence of God, the spiritual concept of "spiritual substance" is quite different from substance (Mind - body dualism ).

Coincidence of Malebranche: Philosophical summary of the Garden of Eden: According to Malebranche, Adam should be considered a coincidence philosopher. Philosophy not only derives from heaven, it was actually derived from the occultism of Malebranche. This is to be able to adhere to his contingent belief that Adam was given the special ability to his body, the ability to separate the main part of the brain (position of the soul) from others. Body In the history of philosophy there are at least two answers to this question. Nicholas Malebranche invented an unexpected situation, which is why God is alone in all events. Therefore, God 's involvement allows past events to cause future events. Therefore, past and future events are related as God makes it show this way. However, the unexpected situation has been criticized by the poor God's achievement and its power. In contrast, Gottfried Leibniz devised a pre-established harmony theory to explain the progress of events in the world. God is again the only reason for all events, but God has only one intervention to determine the course of all future events. The pre-established harmony theory is similar to the situation someone arranges thousands of Domino in some way. Until the emergence of humanism in the Renaissance, medieval philosophy was dominated by academicism. Modern philosophy began in France in the 17th century and its philosophy was Rene de Carte, Blaze Pascal and Nicolas Marebranche. Descartes revived the Western philosophy, which was rejected after the Greek and Roman era. His idea about the first philosophy changed the main purpose of philosophical thought and raised some basic questions for foreigners such as Spinoza, Leibniz, Hume, Berkeley and Kant. Many philosophers still stand out from the classical tradition and regard their philosophy as a way of life. The most noteworthy of these are René Descartes, Baruch Spinoza, Nicolas Malebranche and Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz. With the rise of the university, the concept of modern philosophy became more prominent. Many respected philosophers since the 18th century have participated in university, teaching and developing their work. Early examples include Immanuel Kant, Johann Gottlieb Fichte, Friedrich Wilhelm Joseph Schelling, and Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel.

Political summary of meaning, understanding, and interpretation: In his article "interpretation of politics: modernist turn of Spinoza", Berel Lang applies Spinoza's viewpoint to the explanation of the premise or proposal of the political framework - On the other hand, interpretation is a kind of politics. The main purpose of Spinoza's claim is to oppose the claim that "authoritative interpretation", meaning the meaning of sentences, may be determined by external authorities. Spinoza believes that it can not be forced to understand. Critical interpretation of interpretation: development and research of the principles of interpretation (meaning of sentences can be interpreted as objects of art in the broadest sense, for example). I will deepen my understanding of something from another angle. In order to share the world, the author's "worldview" We must be able to interpret / interpret his / her information. Weltanschauung: Framework of ideas, ethics, beliefs, values. Through these, these values ​​are recognized and interpreted. Level 1: Text specific, Author of Weltenschauung. Level 2: Explain the sentences Weltenschauung gives its own culture. What does the text mean from its own cultural point of view? Level 3: How do you apply text for your own understanding? What does the text mean to you? For Harman, the depth and meaning of the sentence is beyond the contribution of the author himself and is the responsibility of translation. "There are few authors who understand themselves, and correct readers can not only understand their own authors but also can transcend" ZH 6, 22: 10-12). However, understanding the author's opinion and intention without trying the possibility of text does not exclude the author's position. At least, the "transcendence" of the text contains the area, and if the author does not know it, the field is not irrelevant. The author's own unconscious operation and meaning. There are few authors who understand their texts, but few authors know about themselves. This is not the intention or opinion of the author but a picture of creation that more writers express expressions or delegate to translation.

Introduction beyond evil: In my opinion, the problem of evil is the best starting point for a fruitful dialogue with contemporary philosophy recognized as a traditional Christian concept. It is a threat. Therefore, first outlines malicious problems in the most probable way, introduces Augustine's approach to that solution, and then conducts a critical analysis. From Spinoza and Nietzsche, third, it shows that this is more philosophical The problem of evil is expanding beyond human suffering, such as abuse, illness, and evil animals. This version of the problem includes animals suffering from natural evil such as violence and fear that animals face predators, natural disasters, and the history of evolution. Following the expression by Charles Darwin, this is also known as Darwin's evil problem. The second version of the evil problem that applies to animals and the avoidable pain they encounter are caused, for example, by atrocities of animals and by other people. It was shot dead. The problem of such evil has been used by scholars such as John Hick to oppose reaction and defense against evil problems. Unethical but conscious victims Introduction beyond evil: In my opinion, the problem of evil is the best starting point for a fruitful dialogue with contemporary philosophy recognized as a traditional Christian concept. It is a threat. So, I first outline the problem of evil in the most possible way, introduce Augustine's approach to that solution, and then try to do a critical analysis; ... there is a problem of evil, It is a simple and simple fact. Discussion on the evil (and pain) problem proves this fact. The argument over evil shows that God has full power and full power. It shows that God is kind. In other words, he is hoping that only kindness exists. But look at all evil and evil in the world. The god of all good is completely inconsistent. God's almighty is that you can do whatever he wants. So, if God can do anything what he wants, why then?

A number of different philosophers comparing theories of the existence of God have their own theories about the existence of God. They have their own ideas about the way they believe that God is the cause. These philosophers are Anslem, Spinoza and Leibniz. . Anslem is a philosopher who uses ontological thinking to explain the existence of God. The ontological thinking process shows the existence and existence of objects. Anselm's claim is that God is "a real existence and can not even think that it does not exist." There is much debate about the existence of God about the existence of God. For a long time everyone wanted to prove the existence of God. Some people think that God exists and is proved by many philosophical or scientific foundations and religious reasons. On the other hand, others do not believe in the existence of God and their foundation is proved from many theoretical and scientific point of view. Many people try to prove the existence of God with reason. After Descartes proves its existence, he will think the truth about the essence of God, evidence of the existence of God, and the nature of material objects. The main task in Descartes' meditation is to design a system that allows him to understand the truth. He wants to lay the foundation of all further philosophy Since the concept of God was conceived, the existence of God has become a problem. Descartes tried to prove the existence of God, argued against his theory of the devil, and showed that there is no doubt that there is some external existence. He is looking for a definite certainty, the foundation on which he can base on all his beliefs and know that they are real facts. Descartes' overall project is to find a definite certainty that he can be based on all his knowledge and beliefs. Foundation for the existence of God ... God is perfect, almighty, omniscient and can be defined as a creator and ruler considered to be faith and worship for monotheism. Main objectives (1) Many people do not believe any religion. For those who do not believe in religion, there is no reason to believe in God. People who do not believe in God and oppose the existence of God are proving totally wrong. There are many gods

The category of Aristotle's things is called "ambiguous" and they have common names, but the definition corresponding to the name is different. Therefore, the actual male and the person in the picture can be called "animals", but they have common names, but because the definition corresponding to the name is different, they are all arbitrary names . His definition in the case applies only to that situation, in the sense that everyone should define each animal as an animal. Aristotle's classification is a very important philosophical study. Not only is it the pillar of Aristotle's own philosophical theory, it has unparalleled influence on the systems of many great philosophers in the Western tradition. A series of doctrines in this category, which I call classificationism, provides a framework of Aristotle's various philosophical studies, from Aristotle's physics to time theory to metaphysics and even discussions from expansion. He refused Platonic moral philosophy in his ethics at Nikoma. Beyond his own work, Aristotle's taxonomy brought something like primitive man, porphyry, Aquinas, Descartes, Spinoza, Leibniz, Rock, Berkeley, Hume, Kant, Higg. The attention of various philosophers such as Brentano and Heidegger differently accepts, defends, modifies and rejects their central debate. It seems strange to quote Aquinas in articles about Aristotle's category, but I do it for two reasons. First, as Ackrill and Furth commented, Aristotle's plan was severely criticized by scholars and philosophers. But Aquinas' comments on quality shows that a truly talented translator - indeed Aristotle's interpreter is not as big as Aquinas - can satisfy many criticisms. Secondly, and more importantly, Aquinas' attention to quality category suggests its deep historical importance in one of the most important facts of the Aristotle category, ie metaphysical speculative development . In this respect, it can be compared with metaphysical 20th century quantifiers. It is difficult to imagine the analytical metaphysics of the 20th century, regardless of whether the quantifier has the final philosophical significance.

From nature to society In 1690, John Rock laid the foundation for his civil society philosophy in his second government paper. In France after 65 years, Jean Jacques Rousseau began a similar initiative to disintegrate social contracts to an extent that is easy to explain. For their own purposes, the two political philosophers used the same term most notably the "state of nature". It is clear that Rousseau borrowed many lock concepts and cited rocks many times in his argument about the origin of inequality. People are free from the framework provided by the enforcement of natural law and social law, not from nature, not from society and its law. When they are known, they will make their wills relatively free. But they also decided their own limits, that is, limits to achieve human self-configuration goals. Free will is not self-will, but arbitrariness. Spinoza thought in his time that freedom should be understood as a need for freedom rather than arbitrariness. Will is the most active part of human consciousness. It will show you the desire to act, choose the direction of action, decide to act in some way and achieve a goal. In the causal relationship wave, humans are not driftwoods. He is very fine. Freedom is indicated by intentional activities For Karl Marx, humanity reflects their society. It is a product of relationships between human consciousness (their psychology), material world, and society. These three things have created our nature in society, but we also have the basic species nature. Our basic nature or the nature of the species is more important for Marx than our personal character. If they have family conflicts, they are likely to participate in gangs as they are driven out of their families at a young age, and the gang provides a way that is completely independent of their parents' age. Family involvement is also a major aspect of the risk that women will join the group. The extent of the involvement of the women's family affects the development of her life

Anselm Anselm was born in 1033 by aristocratic parents in Aosta, Italy. He and his mother always have a strong relationship, but his relationship with his father is very different. They will never succeed. Anselm wanted to be a priest since he was a young boy. As a child, he imagined that heaven would stay on the Jupiter Hill outside his home, which might help plow this dream. Anselm did not want to become a monk any longer after a short period later, but when he was fifteen he did not become a priest. St. Anselm was born in Ostapiemonte in 1033. Anselm knew that he wanted to be a monk when he was very young. After Anselm's father forbade to follow his dream of becoming a monk, Anselm left the house in his early twenties. Anselm emigrated to France, where he became a monk in 1060. A few years later, Anselm became a precedent for Abbott. At 1093, A. A. Anselm was enshrined as an archbishop. The next few years was a tension and confusion between Anselm and the King about money and other issues ... St. Ansel brought problems to Rome where he was less helped than he thought. In the meantime, King William died and St. Anselm returned to England. The new king made great emphasis on St. Anthony and never denied his view or opinion on important issues. Nevertheless there are still problems like money that need to be solved by Rome. Even if there is a difference in a problem, St. Anthony and the King still have a good relationship. An ontological argument was originally developed by Anselm of Canterbury, a clergy and philosopher of the 12th century. Philosophers and scholars have found several different clues to Anselm's work. The simplified version of Anselm's proof was very popular in modern times (17th - 18th century), which was used with a few examples by Descartes, Spinoza, and Leibniz. A simplified discussion is this: Kant provides two major arguments for this proof. His first critique was traditional criticism. And it was used by Aquinas and many other medieval philosophers. Kant's argument depends on the following assertions: whether it is always two separate problems, one thing. We can say what you like about the essence and essence of things. It is always a matter of asking whether there is something with this essence or essence.

Baruch Spinoza once said that "experiences are not only reasons, they are aware of their behavior, they do not recognize the reasons for deciding these behaviors, so they think they are free," I mentioned. By comparison, we see that our lives and thoughts are the result of our destiny, and that the concept of free will that human beings are only understanding the situation. Likewise, the slaughterhouse of Kurt Vonnegut on May 5 shows the concept of time to explore the fight of free will and destiny and prove that there is no free will in warfare; it is just fate. Slaughterhouse V (Kurt Vonnegut) Slaughterhouse V (Kurt Vonnegut) is a useless novel in itself, but if it is clearly stated on the page, considering only events of today or events in general life, That makes more sense. Using the role of Billy Pilgram, Vonegott conveyed his view on Billy's reaction and common function. If he was truly walking among us, Billy Pilgram is no longer a human being. In Slaughterhouse-Five, Manhattan radio studio Kurt Vonnegut and Billy Pilgrim said, "Among literary critic groups to discuss whether the novel died or not", "one of which is now a burial fiction" Stated. A hundred years after Appomattox, the Virginian wrote Uncle Tom's hut, so it's a good time - this is a reference to Styron's novel - The slaughterhouse at the slaughterhouse in the slaughterhouse was an anti-war novel by Kurt Vonnegut, the most vibrant American writer from 11 November 1920 to 11 April 2007. It is one. This book is unique in that it can be classified as a history novel, science fiction, autobiography (part of the hero's life is similar to Vonegut's life). The slaughterhouse Five follows this lifelong and journey of the main character Billy Pilgrim in this nonlinear novel. Many writers in history wrote science fiction and gained great success, but as time goes by, only a handful of authors are sticking as much as Slaughterhouse-Five of the cart Vonnegut. Slaughterhouse-Five was a personal novel using Vonnegut's experience as a scout of World War II, he was arrested and captured, and in February 1945 he witnessed Dresden. The history of the explosion of fire (the greatest massacre). This novel is about Billy, the lifetime and era of veteran pilgrimages of the Second World War. In Slaughterhouse-Five, Kurt Vonnegut draws time-related topics using structure and perspectives

The existence of objective logic - the existence of a consistent structure of objects - Perception is caused by objects, but it is static and irrelevant to perceptual interpretation, there is subjective logic and that is ours Process used to improve the accuracy of the conceptual model by making conceptual models of consistency observed in the environment, and conceptual models more consistent with existing objective consistency. In our environment Logic is an absolute form of objectivity and is therefore the ability of mathematics and its physical model, but subjective logic is only an attempt to create structurally equivalent objects with real objective structures. + 2 = 4 is always a transcendental truth and is never a mistake. It is deducted from the relevant definition. The mathematics that we express in language is subjective, but the structure that it uses is not only subjective - it is a subjective structure consistent with predictive, objective structure. Objective reasoning refers to reasoning according to a series of logical and objective criteria, subjective thinking refers to reasoning without objective criteria. Objective reasoning refers to inferences unrelated to a specific subjective context and unaffected by personal characteristics, emotions, subjective opinions 1. . Objective thinking means a fair and balanced investigation. In inference it is necessary to define what is worthwhile and related, and this can weight the various factors involved. This assignment of the importance of the various factors involved defines the background and results of the inference process below. When subjectively doing, depending on the nature of the reasoning subject, several factors are emphasized and other factors are alleviated. In his logic George Hegel distinguishes between subjective logic (usually logical) including concepts, judgments, reasoning, but objective logic includes logos, ontologies or metaphysics. Something by ontological reasoning of the Spinoza system. (Lawvere 94), it is alleged that the general structure of topology theory like classification logic and vassals should be considered as a formal embodiment of Hegel 's objective logic. Many of Lawvere's works contain relevant advice. Lawvere, see the mathematics related to philosophy. The existence of objective logic - the existence of a consistent structure of objects - Perception is caused by objects, but it is static and irrelevant to perceptual interpretation, there is subjective logic and that is ours Process used to improve the accuracy of the conceptual model by making conceptual models of consistency observed in the environment, and conceptual models more consistent with existing objective consistency. In our environment

The scientific revolution had a great impact on the enlightenment of the 17th and 18th centuries. The greatest contribution of the scientific revolution to the Enlightenment was to cast doubt on the concept of Christian doctrine through logic. This is beyond speculation that some people act personally among friends and may reach a level beyond the boundaries of any country. The Gutenberg's 15th century printing press made it possible for these great thinkers to spread their theory to those who did not have enormous wealth. God was born and prospered primarily in Europe and North America during the 17th and 18th century Enlightenment Period (please see the God of religious tolerance for details). Many American founder believe themselves as deity, or believe that elements of deity are part of their personal moral philosophy. Examples include Thomas Paine, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, George Washington and others. In addition to understanding our own moral lens, God also provides a useful window for historical ideas behind the establishment of our country. Okay, men and girls, ready to enlightenment In this lesson I will introduce enlightenment. what is that? Enlightenment, sometimes called the era of enlightenment, was an intellectual movement from the late 17th century to the early 18th century, emphasizing reasons, individualism, and skepticism. Enlightenment challenged the traditional religious view. Because that was such a wide movement, enlightenment did not have an accurate start date. It did not pop up, but it gradually developed. Most historians came to the beginning of enlightenment from the mid 17th century to the beginning of the 18th century. The work of intellectuals like Rene Descartes, Barus Spinoza, Isaac Newton is particularly important for the creation of enlightenment. Many critical thinkers believed that religion and reason are hostile in the age of enlightenment in the 17th and 18th centuries. For them, the Middle Ages or the "era of faith" is therefore the opposite of the era of reason. Kant and Voltaire were attacking the Middle Ages as an era of religious decline, and Jimbo in the "History of the decline and decline of the Roman Empire" expressed their contempt for "garbage in the dark ages". But like Petrarch, he saw himself at the cutting edge of the "new era" and criticized it for centuries before his own time, as was the enlightenment writer .

There are two main thoughts or methodologies on the subject of epistemology: rationalism and empiricism. These two completely different schools of thought are trying to answer philosophical questions about how to acquire knowledge. Rationalists believe that this process is entirely within our head, but experientists believe that it will be achieved through sensory experience. After reading and understanding each discussion it is clear that empiricism is the most relative descriptive position in epistemology. Empiricalism is an excellent position in discussions of empiricism and rationalism. Renedecart supports rationalism. That is acquiring knowledge by reason. David Hume supports empiricism and knowledge after experience through experience. Both positions have strong debate. Descartes warns that "something is genuine, I do not understand it is such thing." Descartes believes that it is necessary to "assure that rationality is used for everything" in order to obtain true knowledge. Hume, on the other hand, believes that the connection of ideas is our knowledge. He explains this empirical approach, using three principles of relationship between ideas, ie similarity, time or place continuity, causality. Hume believes that we associate these ideas in our mind with the ideas we gained through experience. Essay.com/a Thesis using direct citation of Hume and Descartes to demonstrate positivism against rationalism For a long time philosophers have intensely discussed the classification of philosophical epistemology into two categories: rationalism and empiricism. We believe that empiricism can acquire knowledge only by observing facts or by experimenting, but rationalism gains knowledge through logical reasoning. Rationalism and empiricism are themselves a very viable way of thinking in philosophy, but the arguments of these philosophical schools become more powerful when combined. Then, please argue, rationalism and empiricism, sum. The fact that philosophers can be rationalists or empiricists was traditionally used in the classification system commonly used in the history of philosophy, especially Kant's description in the first half of the 17th to the 17th century It affects the classification system. . Therefore, Descartes, Spinoza, and Leibniz were erroneously regarded as applying rational core epistemology to a common metaphysical agenda, Rock, Berkeley, and Hume erroneously reached a gradual rejection of their metaphysical claims It was regarded, and everyone consciously tried to improve his predecessor's efforts.

Plato was born in an aristocratic family of Athens in Greece. When he was a child his father, Ariston, was thought of as the descendant of the early king of Athens, and his mother Perictione married Pyrilampes. When young, Plato is always interested in political leadership and eventually becomes a disciple of Socrates. He follows his philosophy and dialectic, and it is believed to pursue the truth through questions, answers and other questions. After witnessing the death of Socrates in the hands of the Athenian Democrat in 399 BC, Plato left Athens and continued his trip to Italy, Sicily and Egypt. Reasons why I chose: Scientific genius of Einstein, Darwin, Newton, and Galileo. The basic philosophy of Socrates, Plato, Aristotle is the cornerstone of Western civilization. Da Vinci and Maimonides have extraordinary abilities to pursue an interdisciplinary spirit. King Solomon's wisdom and women's "international mystery". Finally, Al Ma'arri, Spinoza (Darwin, Galileo, Socrates) has the courage to stick to their own thoughts despite the serious impact of public contempt on death. Finally, I summarize the main points explained in this article. These are very easily integrated into Plato's genius. Its purpose is to emphasize the main reason Plato object to democracy. Plato's claim is shaped by his wonderful idea and another point of his creative genius is shaped by the world in which he lives. There is the possibility of creating a chaotic and disorderly society, which ultimately leads to tyranny, there is a decline in motivation for governance. Second, Plato believes that democratic means of choosing leaders in the world to which social classes and groups belong is not a fertile basis for nurturing an ideal leader. Finally, Plato believes that leaders should be trained for leadership purposes from a young age. Genius Geography, Eric Weiner. Plato once said that "the honor of a certain country has been cultivated there." For teachers, coaches, managers, or anyone who can build other high-quality cultures, you need to read it. In addition, the text of Weiner is very interesting and belongs to his own league. Grit, Angela Duckworth. Talent x effort = skills and skills x effort = achievement. Duckworth says that what matters to us is not nature or cultivation, but cultivating our nature. Being able to stick and stick there is like Duckworth's so-called "grit". She received the MacArthur Genius Award for her research.

Previously from middle English, inlighten, inlightnen, a mixture inspired from middle English ("inspire, illuminate"), from old English inlīhtan, onlīhtan, enlīhten ("to light up," " lightnen ("inspire, illuminate") (same as light + -en) Dutch inlichten ("Introduction, information"), old high German inliuhten ("Introduction, Illuminations"), Gothic ???????? ? (Inliuhtjan, "enlighten", "illuminate"). More inlight, -en Enlightenment (Third person singular form is now realized, now inspiration of participle, simple past and past participle understood) On 30th October 2016, Bernie Evans wrote to the Guardian Big Question as follows. The real responsibility lies in our dangerous hatred of politics. Rather than focusing on genuine dramas that might stimulate the audience, the BBC focuses not on its dramatic output to incorrect historical soap operas, but on conservative politics about that threat It is feared by the house. Please prove our past opinion. As your commentator shows, translators and publishers are aiming to help workers move by stimulating today's movements by providing lessons from the past. Mr. Pexnif warns that it should not be laughing or circling a dear friend and you have to clearly understand that you either answer your questions directly or refuse to be inside yourself not. I gave him inspiration for the mentioned topic Okay, men and girls, ready to enlightenment In this lesson I will introduce enlightenment. what is that? Enlightenment, also known as the age of enlightenment, was an intellectual movement from the late 17th century to the early 18th century, emphasizing reasons, individualism, and skepticism. Enlightenment challenged the traditional religious view. Because that was such a wide movement, enlightenment did not have an accurate start date. It did not pop up, but it gradually developed. Most historians came to the beginning of enlightenment from the middle of the 17th century to the beginning of the 18th century. The work of intellectuals like Rene Descartes, Barus Spinoza, Isaac Newton is particularly important for enlightenment. In particular, British enlightenment depends on the merit of Sir Isaac Newton whose "principle" shocked the world. His Opticks provided a perfect image of their intelligent enlightenment plan to enlightened thinkers by revealing the nature of the light. As Pope Alexander said, Voltaire is so admiring Newton that his mistress is "Venus - Newton." Newton's physics promises to unleash all the secrets of nature using just reason - do not forget that Newton believes in revelation and reason and writes many comments about the Bible.

Various people are watching the world from various angles. There is always a misunderstanding among people in our society, people's response is different. Some choose jealousy, jealousy, and get angry about how to treat myself and other people, others try to do something about it. Still, there are others who believe that the best way to solve problems between people is to understand what they mean, and to rely on them to just live. As Benedict · Spinoza said, "I am not laughing at human behavior, not hating, not understanding, not laughing." It all depends on the background. On the contrary, most recent readers are not discreet, and highly appreciate the classic background. A boring dictionary defines the context as follows. Ideas, the environment, or a fully understandable environment. If you do not have a context, the idea - like the classic idea - is easily misunderstood or completely ignored. In all of our modernity, we lack many classical backgrounds in many ways. This is not a job for a drunk 5 year old child with brutal spelling skills. It is medium English, it is a variant of English that was spoken after 1066 Norman conquest and the 16 th century ago. It has some similarities with modern English, but without annotation (and alcohol), it is difficult to read. The paintings I present are hand-painted, depicting real art and sculpture from various provincial temples. My grandfather loves creativity and creativity. He underestimated that many of his paintings are basic shapes and images, but he was proud and successful in drawing these sketches. Finding these images is not difficult as my grandfather has sketched many different pictures for various activities. For example, I drew an envelope for my birthday, and he put in money. From the beginning, the picture has special connection with me and my family. We love Grandpa and thank him for all his efforts, support and devotion for our lives. Adding these sketches here will create a sense of unity and compassion for religious themes and how religion depicts my grandfather's daily values ​​and ethics.

The smartest friend of your book has changed his face. Our most popular lighting guide currently has twice the help, including guiding style, expanded quotes, and updated quick quizzes. Please tell me your idea. Each of us has guiding principles and philosophy to shape our prospects for life. These principles and philosophy will help us to answer questions about our happiness and our excitement. If your principles and ideas are not clear or missing, step them to fill them and to help them shape them. During the creative process, you will have a bad relationship and a new perspective will be born. The philosophical principle (Latin: Principia Philosophia) is a book by René Descartes. Essentially, it is the integration of the first philosophical approach and meditative discourse. Written in Latin, it was published in 1644. It is devoted to Bohemian Elizabeth and has longstanding friendship with Descartes. The French version (Les Principes de la Philosophie) was published in 1647. It explains the principle of nature - the law of physics - as Descartes sees. Most notably, it proposes the principle that the motion of an object is uniform and straight when there is no external force. Newton borrowed this principle from Descartes into his own Principia; to this day it is still known as the Newton's first movement law. This book is primarily intended to replace the course of Aristotle used in the then university of France and the UK. ... Descartes' philosophical principle (1644; philosophical principle). This shows a deep understanding of the Cartesian system. Spinoza generally accepted Descartes 'physics but he rejected Descartes' metaphysics and opposed the three features: the transcendence of God, the spiritual concept of "spiritual substance" is quite different from substance (Mind - body dualism ). Descartes' meditation is the pursuit of 'first principle' of philosophy. In order for the meditator to understand the principles of philosophy, meditators must decide that they believe they are true and they will never be wrong in their own mind . Therefore, Descartes is using "a suspicious method" as "a sensation-oriented picture trying to abandon criticism of the world critical to the meditator". By using the four phases, Descartes' method can not question any more, please quit your senses to make sure that later it was realy .

By speculative rhetoric, the logic in the sense of standard Semeotic is over. But now, we have to check whether there is a semiotic doctrine corresponding to the objective logic of Hegel, that is, there is life in the sign so that the necessary vehicle exists Hmm. Regardless of the ideological problem, regardless of whether development is the development of the same round, or in addition to such repetitive sequences, regardless of whether there is a greater life history, each symbol is a life career I have a history of life history. What is its essence The existence of objective logic - the existence of a consistent structure of objects - Perception is caused by objects, but it is static and irrelevant to perceptual interpretation, there is subjective logic and that is ours Process used to improve the accuracy of the conceptual model by making conceptual models of consistency observed in the environment, and conceptual models more consistent with existing objective consistency. In our environment In his logic George Hegel distinguishes between subjective logic (usually logical) including concepts, judgments, reasoning, but objective logic includes logos, ontologies or metaphysics. Something by ontological reasoning of the Spinoza system. (Lawvere 94), it is alleged that the general structure of topology theory like classification logic and vassals should be considered as a formal embodiment of Hegel 's objective logic. Many of Lawvere's works contain relevant advice. Lawvere, see the mathematics related to philosophy. Before Hegel, this theme (essential doctrine) was not considered part of logic at all. Today, it is often covered by historical and scientific philosophy or research methods. It is called objective logic because it explains the process of unknowingly executing knowledge, as determined by objective laws. In contrast, subjective logic begins with an abstract concept whose central creative concepts are developed and become increasingly more specific theoretical practices such as the history of scientific development; for example, in the Periodic Table of the Elements Chemical science after discovering concept

In the three departments of the federal government there are three departments: the executive department, the judicial branch, and the legislature. The executive department consists of the president, ministers, and the executive department of the president. The executive branch is known for implementing legislation enacted by the legislature. The US Supreme Court and the Federal Court of Justice are required for judicial organizations. The judiciary must review the laws enforced by enforcement agencies. All three branches of the federal government are concentrated in the region: the US Congress (Congress), the president (management) and the US Supreme Court (justice). There are monuments and museums in many countries in Washington, mostly located in or around the National Mall. The city has 177 foreign embassies and other international organizations, labor unions, nonprofit organizations, lobbying groups, and the Americas Organization, the American Retiree Association, the National Geographic Society, the human rights campaign, the International Finance Corporation and the American Red We have the headquarters of professional association, such as the Cross The US local governments (city / county), state government, and the federal government have three levels of government. Here, I am most concerned about the federal government. Rock, Spinoza, Blackstone and Meng Squee: Many of the concepts can be traced back to the progressive thinkers of the US government, for example in the 17th and 18th centuries. The legislative (parliament), administrative (president) and judicial (Supreme Court): For some of my ideas, the government's US system has three branches. The most important 'Constitution' and the balanced file: one of the three branches of the federal government, with the government, relations with the state The three branches of the US government are legislative, executive and judicial. According to the principle of decentralization, the US Constitution assigns federal government authority to these three branches and establishes a system of checks and balances so that branches are not too strong. In The Federalist, James Madison needs to separate the authorities into a new democratic government that wrote memorably: "A set of all power, legislative, enforcement, and justice, in the same same hand, it Whether there is, some, or many, hereditary, self-appointed or elected, of course, can argue with the definition of tyranny. "

Gentleman, I do not doubt that you will think seriously about me. "This reminds us of the first important concept of making us think about enlightenment, we tend to think of enlightenment as all-or-nothing, some people will understand or some will not understand I consider relative enlightenment, for example if all or not is correct, do not understand, so please do not speak today Today 's all - or - nothing method is correct, which is a serious methodology It may be the above problem, but it may be enlightened like sex.Madness behavior - What happened when you actually experienced sexual behavior! Ours about enlightenment Is everything like a group of virgins of children who are speculating sexual intercourse? Okay, men and girls, ready to enlightenment In this lesson I will introduce enlightenment. what is that? Enlightenment, also known as the age of enlightenment, was an intellectual movement from the late 17th century to the early 18th century, emphasizing reasons, individualism, and skepticism. Enlightenment challenged the traditional religious view. Because that was such a wide movement, enlightenment did not have an accurate start date. It did not pop up, but it gradually developed. Most historians came to the beginning of enlightenment from the middle of the 17th century to the beginning of the 18th century. The work of intellectuals like Rene Descartes, Barus Spinoza, Isaac Newton is particularly important for enlightenment. In particular, British enlightenment depends on the merit of Sir Isaac Newton whose "principle" shocked the world. His Opticks provided a perfect image of their intelligent enlightenment plan to enlightened thinkers by revealing the nature of the light. As Pope Alexander said, Voltaire is so admiring Newton that his mistress is "Venus - Newton." Newton's physics promises to unleash all the secrets of nature using just reason - do not forget that Newton believes in revelation and reason and writes many comments about the Bible.

En · Light · Ened · Ly · Adverben · Light · Ened · Noun · Light · Ener, Nounen · Light · Enningly, Adverbnon · En · Light · Ened, Adjectivenon · En · Light · en · Ing, Adjective · Light · en, Verb (for objects) pre · en · light · en, verb, noun · en · light · en, verb (for objects) unen en · light · ened, adjective · en · light · en · ing, adjective well · en · light · ened, adjective Okay, men and girls, ready to enlightenment In this lesson I will introduce enlightenment. what is that? Enlightenment, also known as the age of enlightenment, was an intellectual movement from the late 17th century to the early 18th century, emphasizing reasons, individualism, and skepticism. Enlightenment challenged the traditional religious view. Because that was such a wide movement, enlightenment did not have an accurate start date. It did not pop up, but it gradually developed. Most historians came to the beginning of enlightenment from the middle of the 17th century to the beginning of the 18th century. The work of intellectuals like Rene Descartes, Barus Spinoza, Isaac Newton is particularly important for enlightenment. In particular, British enlightenment depends on the merit of Sir Isaac Newton whose "principle" shocked the world. His Opticks provided a perfect image of their intelligent enlightenment plan to enlightened thinkers by revealing the nature of the light. As Pope Alexander said, Voltaire is so admiring Newton that his mistress is "Venus - Newton." Newton's physics promises to unleash all the secrets of nature using just reason - do not forget that Newton believes in revelation and reason and writes many comments about the Bible. Enlightenment (also known as the age of enlightenment and reason; French: "century of light" leSiècledes Lumières; and German: "enlightenment" Aufklärung) is an intellectual and philosophical movement of the 18th century and is Europe . The world of thought dominates. Enlightenment included a series of ideas that used rationality as the main source of authority and justification, ideas such as freedom, progress, tolerance, fraternity, constitutionalism, and separation of church and state were proposed. In France, the central principle of lesLumières is personal freedom and religious tolerance to the monarchy and the absolute principle of the Roman Catholic Church. Enlightenment is characterized by emphasizing scientific methods and simplification, and more questions about religious legitimacy - this attitude is captured by Sapere aude.

Energy is known for its long tradition and thought to be part of Japanese culture, but due to their cast, medieval Japanese rhythm of the 14th and 16th centuries, most of today Japanese people do not like this drama. . Modern Japanese users do not understand and they lack penetration into the entertainment community. However, by understanding dramatic plots such as Ise-Monogatari, Genji Monogatari, Heike Monogatari, you can gain enjoyment and gratitude performance as an intermediary between God and man (Handout 14). . Enlightenment (or called enlightenment or rational period) is a traditional intellectual movement that began in Europe in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, emphasizing reasons and individualism rather than tradition. Its purpose is to reform the usage of reason in that area based on experimental thinking of rehearsals and beliefs, and advanced vision to transcend logical methods. It promotes logical beliefs, skepticism and intellectual communication. It challenges superstition and intolerance and is the most popular goal of the Catholic Church. Okay, men and girls, ready to enlightenment In this lesson I will introduce enlightenment. what is that? Enlightenment, sometimes called the era of enlightenment, was an intellectual movement from the late 17th century to the early 18th century, emphasizing reasons, individualism, and skepticism. Enlightenment challenged the traditional religious view. Because that was such a wide movement, enlightenment did not have an accurate start date. It did not pop up, but it gradually developed. Most historians came to the beginning of enlightenment from the mid 17th century to the beginning of the 18th century. The work of intellectuals like Rene Descartes, Barus Spinoza, Isaac Newton is particularly important for the creation of enlightenment. Another important moment in the development of Western culture is enlightenment. Enlightenment was an intellectual movement that took place from the end of the 17th century to the beginning of the 19th century. Enlightenment emphasized the contents of reason, science and skepticism. The attitude and values ​​we have today are mainly products of enlightenment. In particular, Thomas Jefferson was deeply influenced by Enlightenmentism, the ideal of the Enlightenment the foundation of the American government.

Metaphysical thought of enlightenment was full of changes in the 18th century. Dryden, Pope, and Johnson ruled literature. Fahrenheit is making his first mercury thermometer. Boston Tea ceremony and the French Revolution occurred. However, some of the most intense changes occur in thinking. Before the 18th century, thoughters such as Locke, Spinoza, Descartes, Hobbes dominated Western thought, people's perception of the world changed. Enlightenment, also known as the age of reason, was the era of the entire 18th century society, religion, and political revolution that changed human thoughts during this "waking up" period. This is the liberation of ignorant thoughts, thoughts and actions, and as these thoughts, thoughts and actions have been separated from ignorance of how to maintain and adhere to society, there is little room for new ideas about the world. Puritan society has discovered that these new ideas are extremely radical in comparison. Do you think about relationships with society? From the 17th century to the 18th century, or during the Enlightenment era, thoughts about social relations and interpersonal relationships began to improve, those who used their voice to claim equality and justice, It was difficult to accept. Idea RenéDescartes (French), Discourse Method, 1637. "... ... according to the law that she has established since the ancient dictatorship of the empire and has not been abolished since ancient times ... all arrogant and disobedient serfs and farmers are arrested and the laws taken to the nearest place The Office should not be punished and should not be punished as a public turmoil of peace 4 Mary · Walstone Craft, advocacy of women's rights in 1792

... Ontology's position is "the first philosophy" - the most fundamental philosophical discipline. According to Levinas, the ontology intrinsically tries to create a whole where different things and "other" are inevitably returned to the identity and identity. According to Levinas, the desire for this whole is a basic form of expression. The contemplation of the first philosophy is representative of his idea. "First philosophy" simply means the first thing to do in philosophy. The most important point as a philosopher of Descartes is that the "first philosophy" has changed due to what he did. Aristotle became the first in philosophy since becoming metaphysical. Therefore, the first question the philosophy has to answer is the truth. That is decided, we can do all the other things. Through this arrangement, we can say that philosophy cooperates with the priority of ontology. In meditation, I understood that the problem of knowledge stands out. If there are problems with the problems we know, we may not even know what is true. However, if knowledge issues have to be resolved first, this establishes philosophical epistemological priorities. In fact, this led to the emergence of epistemology and epistemology, which was the first time as an independent field of philosophy. Experienceism is experience René Descartes, often referred to as the father of modern philosophy, suggests that philosophy should start with a fundamental suspicion about the possibility of obtaining reliable knowledge. In 1641, in the meditation of the first philosophy, he attempted to determine something with the most certain knowledge using this suspicious method. He chose Cogito ergo sum ("I think so, so I am") of a famous statement as the basis of his philosophy. Then he tried to rebuild the body of knowledge based on what he was thought to be without doubt. This includes proving the existence of God, using other methods, using the form of ontological argument). Descartes' method is called rationalism and fascinates philosophers like Baruch Spinoza, Gottfried Leibniz, Christian Wolff.

The enlightenment of the United States was the host of a society that accepts the practice of slavery. Most people think this is a habit; especially in the south the economy will collapse (Davis 1). However, slaves do not cooperate with their slavery, there is a rebellion like the Stornano rebellion of 1739 ('Storono rebellion' apex 1). The treatment of slaves depends on the severity of the owner and the general rules of the area. In the age of enlightenment, so-called "authoritarianism with enlightenment" appeared. In authoritarian form, the rulers were influenced by enlightenment. Strictly speaking, these "enlightened" rulers are different from the sacred right of the king, as the former accepted the basic principles of enlightenment such as reasons and humanitarianism. For example, it is said that Joseph II of the Holy Roman Empire (1765 - 1790) completely accepted the concept of social contract. Frederick the Great of Prussia (control number 1740-1786) also allowed slavery, but kept the ideal of enlightenment. In Russia of the 19th century, Alexander II adopted the thought of enlightened and released serfs. In the end, even the enlightened authoritarianism is destined to be replaced in the historical process. Okay, men and girls, ready to enlightenment In this lesson I will introduce enlightenment. what is that? Enlightenment, sometimes called the era of enlightenment, was an intellectual movement from the late 17th century to the early 18th century, emphasizing reasons, individualism, and skepticism. Enlightenment challenged the traditional religious view. Because that was such a wide movement, enlightenment did not have an accurate start date. It did not pop up, but it gradually developed. Most historians came to the beginning of enlightenment from the mid 17th century to the beginning of the 18th century. The work of intellectuals like Rene Descartes, Barus Spinoza, Isaac Newton is particularly important for the creation of enlightenment.

Enlightenment has brought new ideas and messages to society dominated by dominant power: the church. In these dark times, the ultimate authority over people dominated their powerful 'hint' power beyond their religious doctrine and their national leaders. For centuries, as the world's largest and wealthiest organization, the church has the power to oppress free thinkers. In front of the mass communication, most educated literate people were Christian monks who managed information mainly about religious texts and handed the selected information to ignorant masses. Religious tolerance: I am skeptical about religious facilities, but I think many enlightenment thinkers should freely worship according to their own wishes. "The intellectuals of enlightenment was energetically requesting to restrict the political power of organized religion to contain the intolerance of religious war," Abnerz said. Freedom: tolerance to the religion of the Illuminati is related to individual freedom to emphasis. This concept considers that God and nature give fundamental rights to all human beings and that humans should be able to act freely without being limited by oppression. "These philosophers highlight that the government does not have authority over individual conscience," Abernethy explained. "Individuals have rights, everyone is equal, and legitimate political power is based on people's consent, and it is mandatory to express the will of people." Enlightenment thinkers oppose superstition. An enlighten thinker cooperated with the enlightened tyrant, the enlightened ruler of the absolute, who tried to force some new ideas about the government to be carried out. Enlightenment has great influence on European culture, politics and government. Beginning in the 17th century, it was a philosopher Francis Bacon (1562-1626), Baruch Spinoza (1632-1677), John Rock (1632-1704), Pierre Vail (1647-1706), Voltaire (1694-1778) It was started by. , Francis Hutchin, (1694-1746), David Hume (1711-1776) and physicist Isaac Newton (1643-1727). The prince often supports and develops these figures, and even attempts to apply their government concepts to so-called enlightened absoluteism. The scientific revolution is closely related to enlightenment, as its discovery reverses many traditional notions and introduces a new view on the state of nature and humanity.

In the nineteenth century, the popular philosophy - especially Hegel 's dialectic - declared that humans are moving upwards and becoming more angels. Support of democracy and equal rights started to spread, so human moral law has advanced. However, Friedrich Nietzsche believes that humanity is moving towards a vicious circle of complete decadence. Indeed, modern people with "advanced" morality are corrupt in their minds. Moral assertion only obscures the collapse of contemporary people: Is he hiding behind a moral formula and a decent concept? Friedrich Nietzsche (1844-1900) abandoned the foolish view of history to the ideal state and state, but he explicitly borrowed many of his right-wing Hegel values ​​and reassessed all values did. From there we took the moral premise of Christianity. Photo Nietzsche is the moral division of the master between good and evil (promoting or not disturbing Master's motivation) and the difference between the slaves of good and evil (the master of power-oriented goals and slaves, superiority Only) and clearly distinguish it. Status to prove) Nietzsche's view on morality is far less known than some of his amazing coins: immorality, superhumanity, master's morality, morality of slavery, transcendence of good and evil, motivation, all values Re-evaluation of the philosophy by hammer. These really belong to his important concept, but they can only be understood correctly in the context. Plato's thought and shape, God of Spinoza, Berkeley's thought, and Kant's intuition are generally not the same philosophical terms, but few think that they are doing it. But for Nietzsche, this error is common - not to mention that other philosophers (if any) are equal to the brilliance and clues of his expression (if any). His words heard once will never be forgotten; they stand up and do not need background support; so they live irrespective of their father's intentions.