Every occupation, social class and religiosus group have their own morals and duties. Furthermore... more Every occupation, social class and religiosus group have their own morals and duties. Furthermore, these moral duties, together with their motivation, differs from time to time and from an individual to individual. Stealing, for instance, is not an immoral action for thiefs; unless they do not steal from each other. Or, digging a pit for someone was immoral before, now, in capitalism, is a rule and necessity. But, is this the whole story? Isn’t there an objective rule, an universal law, at least a formal schema for ethics? According to Kant, there is such a law and schema. He calls that “supreme nature of morality” (1999: 44) and grounds it on the good will and human rationality. In this paper, I will try to explain Kant's “doctrine of morals” (1999: 43) and indicate some examples of it.
In my paper, I will try to compare Kant’s and Hegel’s approach to the 18th century ideal of the b... more In my paper, I will try to compare Kant’s and Hegel’s approach to the 18th century ideal of the beautiful soul and discuss their relevance to Dostoevky’s protagonist, Prince Myshkin in The Idiot. I say “I will” because it very difficult to think of Dostoevky and Myshkin when İstanbul is up in arms. Digressing ethical sphare, and nestling in solitide and silence is like a squering the circle while İstanbul has come together and gone to “Gezi.” Nonetheless, I will do my best.
In my paper, I will try to compare Thomas Mann’s novel, The Magic Mountain with Edith Wharton's ... more In my paper, I will try to compare Thomas Mann’s novel, The Magic Mountain with Edith Wharton's novel, The Age of Innocence. Considering the dynamics of Bildungsroman, I will comment on the differences between the Archer Newland and Han Castrop – protagonists of the novels. I will also make some comparisons between two other integral characters - May Welland and Clavdia Chauchat. These comparisons will have some philosophical backgrounds – especially, Kant's duty ethics and Hegel's dialectics of recognition. I will argue that Hans Castrop starts where Archer, or more precisely, Ellen ends. Put it differently, Hegel's ethics starts where Kant's ethics ends. No one is innocent, Hegel is right, “Innocence is merely non-action, like the mere being of a stone, not even that of a child.” (1977: 282)
In this paper, I will try to reveal some integral parts of Wittgenstein's philosophical investiga... more In this paper, I will try to reveal some integral parts of Wittgenstein's philosophical investigation – “language game”, “rule following”, and “family resemblance.” I will argue that Wittgenstein's new way of looking at language is intrinsically bounded up with his new way of doing philosophy. In this sense, Wittgenstein's philosophical investigation is a grammatical one. It can also be labeled as a therapeutical work. Nonetheless, the most significant part of my paper will be related to so-called “private language argument.” Because it is the upshot of Wittgenstein's grammatical investigation. It exposes the fact that language is a totality of social agreements which are grounded on human bodies. Primitive reactions, in other words, avowals are prototypes of language. The word prototype reminds of the word foundation. But Wittgenstein deliberately does not use it since it is a very loaded term, and the term with sharpened edges. Wittgenstein does not prefers such terms, he is fond of terms with “blurred edges.” Because language itself is blurred mode of representation - i.e. game. Consequently, “the human body is the best picture of the human soul.” (p. 178) That is to say, we can not think of soul and language without body. It follows that solipsism is the multi-vehicle pileup of dualism created by the old view of looking at language, that is, picture theory of language. Wittgenstein, however, is not a behaviorist. He is a philosopher of neither nor. This conceptualization neither will be the last explanation of my term paper.
Uploads
Papers by Şenol Gürkan