Etimoloji Dokunmaçı
Metaphysics as a Guide to Morals / Iris MurdochWhat we see is the Demiurg's model of the eternal reality, made in
another material, while he can see the original. This is something which
we can imagine, as a picture of our relation to an absolute. The
Demiurge sees the Forms, responding to their magnetism, but does not of
course converse with them. These magnetic and illuminateing objects are
seperate and unresponsive. They are in and with themselves, simple and
eternal: not the sort of thing with whic one holds a dialogue. We do not
have dialogues with Goodness. In an important sense Goodness MUST be
Ides. If an incarnate model is proposed we still must judge the model.
Only to say 'must' and 'judge' sounds rather too harsh and mechanical.
In Platonic terms we recognise what we already know. Goodness is an
idea, an ideal, yet it is also evidently and actively incarnate all
around us, charged with the love which Demiurge feels for the eternal
Forms as he creates the cosmos. So we are ALSO able to evoke mystical
Buddhas and mystical Christs who as historical figures were imperfect
men, together with innumerable other images and tokens of perfect
spiritual ideas. Buber's memorable distinction between the I-Thou
relation and the I-it relation seems to simple and exclusive, and may
indeed suggest the old fascinating division of fact from value, which
makes nothing of the greater part of our ordinary life of knowings and
actings. Much, in some cases most, of our spiritual energy and
understanding comes from non-reciprocal relationships with what is
beyond and other. Our relation with a foreign language which we are
learning is not reciprocal. (That we may enjoy what we learn is another
matter.) We are helped if we have active principles of dilligence and
truthfulness standing by. If what we are learning is to love a person
unselfishly, we have the privilege of dialogu, and need also the
presence of good ideals and desires. In either case the impersonal
'presence' may be felt as external (the voice of duty, the ideal of
goodnessi etc.) or as an instinctive source of relevant power.
(Elsewhere in the soul.) Buber wondering how one might give sense to
Heidegger's concept of Being, refers to Christian mystics and
scholastics who speak of contemplating the Godhead as it is in itself
prior to creation. But he adds that Eckhart follows Plato in holding
that God is above Being. "Est denim Deus super esse et ens". Only of
course Plato says this of Good, not God. The supreme principle of love
is not and cannot be an existing thing (or person) and is separate from,
though magnetically connected with, contingent 'stuff' however thought
of in some contexts as fundamental. God or gods, or a metaphysical
conception of History, or a Life Force or Cosmic Rhytm, or protons or
genes or DNA, or "archi-écriture", may be or have been (plausibly or
implausibly) said to have some "fundamental" status which is to be
contrasted with ordinary existence. But Good would not be a part of
this, it would be above it in the position of its judge.
another material, while he can see the original. This is something which
we can imagine, as a picture of our relation to an absolute. The
Demiurge sees the Forms, responding to their magnetism, but does not of
course converse with them. These magnetic and illuminateing objects are
seperate and unresponsive. They are in and with themselves, simple and
eternal: not the sort of thing with whic one holds a dialogue. We do not
have dialogues with Goodness. In an important sense Goodness MUST be
Ides. If an incarnate model is proposed we still must judge the model.
Only to say 'must' and 'judge' sounds rather too harsh and mechanical.
In Platonic terms we recognise what we already know. Goodness is an
idea, an ideal, yet it is also evidently and actively incarnate all
around us, charged with the love which Demiurge feels for the eternal
Forms as he creates the cosmos. So we are ALSO able to evoke mystical
Buddhas and mystical Christs who as historical figures were imperfect
men, together with innumerable other images and tokens of perfect
spiritual ideas. Buber's memorable distinction between the I-Thou
relation and the I-it relation seems to simple and exclusive, and may
indeed suggest the old fascinating division of fact from value, which
makes nothing of the greater part of our ordinary life of knowings and
actings. Much, in some cases most, of our spiritual energy and
understanding comes from non-reciprocal relationships with what is
beyond and other. Our relation with a foreign language which we are
learning is not reciprocal. (That we may enjoy what we learn is another
matter.) We are helped if we have active principles of dilligence and
truthfulness standing by. If what we are learning is to love a person
unselfishly, we have the privilege of dialogu, and need also the
presence of good ideals and desires. In either case the impersonal
'presence' may be felt as external (the voice of duty, the ideal of
goodnessi etc.) or as an instinctive source of relevant power.
(Elsewhere in the soul.) Buber wondering how one might give sense to
Heidegger's concept of Being, refers to Christian mystics and
scholastics who speak of contemplating the Godhead as it is in itself
prior to creation. But he adds that Eckhart follows Plato in holding
that God is above Being. "Est denim Deus super esse et ens". Only of
course Plato says this of Good, not God. The supreme principle of love
is not and cannot be an existing thing (or person) and is separate from,
though magnetically connected with, contingent 'stuff' however thought
of in some contexts as fundamental. God or gods, or a metaphysical
conception of History, or a Life Force or Cosmic Rhytm, or protons or
genes or DNA, or "archi-écriture", may be or have been (plausibly or
implausibly) said to have some "fundamental" status which is to be
contrasted with ordinary existence. But Good would not be a part of
this, it would be above it in the position of its judge.
Yükleniyor...
Şiir Tahlili: “Metaphysics as a Guide to Morals” – Iris Murdoch
Murdoch’un şiiri, felsefi temsilleri ve ahlaki kavramları birbirine bağlayarak metafiziksel düşüncenin insan davranışına nasıl rehberlik edebileceğini sorgular. Şiir, Platon’un “Forms” (Şekiller) kavramını, Buber’in I‑Thou ilişkisini ve Christian mistisizminin derinliğini bir araya getirir. Aşağıdaki analiz, şiirin temel temalarını, yapısal özelliklerini ve dilsel stratejilerini incelemektedir.
1. Tematik Çerçeve
- Demiurg ve Sonsuz Gerçeklik: Şiir, “Demiurg” (yaratıcı) kavramını kullanarak evrenin yaratılış sürecini metafizik bir perspektiften ele alır. Murdoch, Demiurg’un “başka bir maddede” yaratma yeteneğini vurgular; bu, evrenin ötesinde var olan “Eternal Reality” (Sonsuz Gerçeklik) ile bir bağ kurar.
- İyi’nin Doğası: “Goodness” (İyilik) kavramı şiirin merkezinde yer alır. Murdoch, İyi’nin hem bir “idea” (fikir) hem de “incarnated” (canlandırılmış) varlık olduğunu söyler. İyi, Platon’un “Forms” gibi soyut ve zamansız bir varlık olarak kabul edilirken aynı zamanda evrendeki her şeyde hissedilir.
- İletişim ve Diyalog: Şiir, “dialogue” (diyalog) kavramının önemini vurgular. Murdoch, I‑Thou ilişkisini Buber’in “I‑It” ayrımına karşı koyar; gerçek anlamda diyalog, insanın kendisini ve diğerini keşfetmesi için kritik bir araçtır.
- Mistik Figürler: Buddha, Christ ve diğer mistik figürlerin “perfect spiritual ideas” (mükemmel ruhsal fikirler) olarak kullanılmasının, insanın gerçekliği anlamak için bu figürlerden ilham alabileceğini gösterir.
2. Yapısal Özellikler
- Serbest Akış: Şiir, klasik bir ölçü veya ritme bağlı kalmadan serbest biçimde ilerler. Bu yapı, şiirin felsefi akıl yürütme sürecini yansıtarak okuyucuya düşünsel bir yolculuk sunar.
- Paralel Cümleler: Çoğu satır, “while he can see the original” gibi paralel yapılar içerir. Bu yapı, okuyucuya aynı kavramı farklı açılardan görme fırsatı verir.
- Teknolojik ve Metafizik Kelime Oyunu: “magnetism”, “illuminateing objects” gibi terimler, hem fiziksel hem de metafizik anlamda çekim ve aydınlatma kavramlarını birleştirir.
3. Dilsel Stratejiler
- Çok Anlamlılık: “Goodness” kelimesi hem evrensel bir kavram olarak hem de bireysel deneyimle ilişkilendirilir. Bu, şiirin okuyucuya farklı yorumlar sunmasına olanak tanır.
- Teknik Terminoloji: Platon, Buber ve Heidegger gibi filozofların isimleri şiire entegre edilmiştir. Bu, okuyucuyu felsefi bir bağlamda düşünmeye teşvik eder.
- İkili Karşıtlık: “I‑Thou” vs. “I‑It”, “Magnetic vs. Illuminating objects” gibi ikili yapılar, şiirin tematik çatışmalarını pekiştirir.
4. Ahlaki Çıkarım
Şiirin sonunda Murdoch, “Good” kavramının evrenin üstünde bir yargılayıcı konumda olduğunu vurgular. İyi, “üstün” bir varlık olarak kabul edilir; bu nedenle, insan davranışları ve kararları bu üst varlığa yöneliktir. Şiir, “iyi”yi takip etmenin insanı hem bireysel hem de toplumsal düzeyde ahlaki bir yönlendirme sunacağını öne sürer.
5. Sonuç
Iris Murdoch’un “Metaphysics as a Guide to Morals” şiiri, felsefi kavramları şiirsel bir dille harmanlayarak okura derinlemesine düşünme fırsatı verir. Şiir, metafiziksel gerçeklik ve ahlaki değerler arasındaki ilişkiyi sorgularken, diyalogun insanın kendini ve diğerini anlamadaki rolünü vurgular. Bu yapı, şiiri sadece bir felsefi metin değil aynı zamanda ahlaki bir rehber haline getirir.
Not: Bu tahlil otomatik üretilmiştir ve geliştirme aşamasındadır.