Adonis Diaries

Posts Tagged ‘Jostein Gaarder

“Sophie’s World” on Indo-European and Semitic civilizations; (Dec. 15, 2009)

Since the 19th century, European “nations” have been trying to set up a “coherent” racist ideology, disguised as “civilization difference”, to supporting their colonial expansions.

Thus, many European “elites” of philosophers and “thinkers” fabricated the Indo-European civilization in order to have any kind of fictitious basis to distinguish themselves from the “non-European” people. Ironically, the author Jostein Gaarder seems absolutely convinced with this fictitious story.

First and obviously, as an axiom or evident proposition, the Europeans had the best civilization. Thus, the antithesis was that the Semitic and other “Chinese sort” of civilizations were lumped at the other extreme end.

Second and obviously, Semitic civilization had to be fabricated in order to satisfy Hegel theory of dialectical processes of history for human knowledge development.

Third, the European nations had no purpose to reaching any synthesis among civilizations: They were on a war path to dominate, win, and prove the superiority of their “Indo-European civilization”.

Actually, the civil wars in Europe and the USA always ended with a victor regardless of cost, trauma, and casualties such as the civil wars in the USA, Spain, England, and France. In non-European cultures, civil wars end with no clear-cut winner in the short-term.

In China, the communists and “nationalists” signed a truce to confront the occupying Japanese. India civil war between Hindus and Moslems ended after its independence with the third of the population remaining Moslems, even though Pakistan was created for repatriating Moslems to that new State.

In Lebanon, 17 years of civil war ended with all factions losing, and their leaders appointed deputies and members in the successive governments. (that is the worst ending for any nation).

The story goes that four thousand years ago, primitive people concentrated in the Caucasus region around the Black Sea (the actual States of Georgia, Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Chechnya…). They immigrated westward to central and north Europe and also eastward to Iran and India.

In the Arabic Peninsula, there were tribal people who immigrated to Syria, Iraq, Egypt, and North Africa and are called Semitic. (Now, why people would settle in arid desert land or in high mountain chains in order to survive? It looks like this rational question was beside the point. We know that people settle in mild weather regions rich in water resources, and they immigrate to God forsaken regions to flee persecutions. This logical question seems also beside the point to the Indo-European ideology).  Let us move on.

On religion: Indo-European civilization believed in a variety of Gods (this was true with the Semitic category, but facts had to be altered to suit the dichotomy method).

In the original Indian language of Sanskrit the celestial God Dyaus was transferred into Zeus, Jupiter (Jov-pater), and Tyr (for the Nordic people). (Can you show me any resemblance in phonetics?).  The Viking God Aser was transformed from Sanskrit Asura and Persian Ahura; (What about Ashur that was adopted in Babylon and the Near East or Ashtarut?)

Another example, in Latin we have Deus and in Old Norse Tivurr which were transformed from the Sanskrit Deva and the Persian Daevra; (should I continue with this masquerade of God’s names?)

(Consequently, Semitic civilization must believe in one God. Trinity is thus the creation of the Greco-Roman culture for altering Christianity initial dogma.  Allah or El was the supreme God, even though He didn’t generated money from the worshipers who dedicated their money to their more practical and pragmatic local business Gods.)

On myths: There are stories on immortal potions, struggle of the Gods against monsters of chaos, the subject playing a drama in which forces of Good and Evil confront one another in a relentless struggle, predicting the Good to win. For example, the Indo-European civilization, specifically the Greek, have tendencies to speculate on how to view the world (philosophy); they have “insight” into the history of the world and the concept of “cosmic vision”.

Thus, vision (the seeing sense) was the most important among the senses and images of Gods in pictures, and sculptures were predominantly used to honor the Gods. (Gaarder must have forgotten that “cosmic vision” is the realm of nomads in deserts, where stars appear close to hand reach.)  Indo-European civilization view history as cyclical, just like seasons; (what kinds of seasons they have up north? I thought there are long winters and a very short stuffy summers.)

Consequently, Semitic civilization had to rely on hearing or the auditory sense.  For example: “Hear, O Israel (Land of El)” or “Thus spake Jehovah”, or “In the beginning was the word”.  Why?

Because tribes relayed their culture verbally by repetitive story telling.  As if the Nordic people didn’t rely on the verbal (could they write a thousand years ago and had they documented their culture?). No matter, since the Greek learned to write then the ideology stands viable.

Anyway, since the Semitic must be in the auditory realm of the senses, then images of God in pictures and sculptures had to be prohibited for the western racist ideologies to take roots.

On after death: Transmission of the soul in Indo-Europe culture is cyclical, the soul is transferred to new-born and the ultimate purpose of life is for the soul to be released from this infernal cycle. .Thus, for the Semitic civilization, history must be linear and that is why they were preoccupied recording history!

God created the world and it will end with the Judgment Day. Thus, there is a distance between God and his creation so that Semitic believers were to be redeemed from their sins by prayers, and the study of the scriptures rather than by self-communion and meditation as Indo-European behave!

Can we propose that Hegel’s theory of dialectical processes of history for human knowledge development had set the stage for western superiority ideology, the re-writing of history to suit the feable minded philosophers and politicians?

“Sophie’s World” on David Hume; (Written on Dec. 4, 2009)

How I stumbled on Jostein Gaarder’s “Sophie’s World”, one of New York Times best seller?

My niece is reading this book as required textbook in high school. The manuscript is of 513 pages divided in 35 chapters and talking of a wide array of philosophers and concepts from Socrates, to Descartes, to Hume, Hegel, Kant…, Freud, and the Big Bang.

A short introduction to the story might be entertaining.

The first chapter introduces us to Sophie Amundsen, a 15-year-old girl. Sophie arrives home from school and finds a first envelope addressed to her. The sheet of paper has a single hand written sentence “Who are you?”  Sophie finds another envelops that says “Where does the world come from?

The last delivery of the mailbox is a postcard “Hilde Moller Knag; c/o Sophie Amundsen, 3 Clover Close. Dear Hilde, happy 15th birthday. Forgive me for sending the card to Sophie. It was the easiest way. Love Dad.”

Sophie knows of no Hilde and the phonebook was of no help. Sophie has now three problems to resolve, all in one day. Sophie is baffled and confused:  She is starting her philosophical initiation.  Would Lillemor be the same person? If her hair was not straight and defying all cosmetics for a curly appearance, then would she behaved different? If her nose was a tad bit longer or her mouth smaller, would she be the actual Sophie?

The next problem is even harder to reflect on. Can anything come from nothing? If not, then how far has she to go to the sources in the creation process? Can a creating God come from nothing?

I jumped to page 267 on the British philosopher David Hume (1711-1776). 

Hume was the contemporary of Voltaire and Rousseau or the Age of Enlightenment.  The previous Age was of the “rationalists” such as Descartes, Lock, and Spinoza.

Hume published his main work “A treatise of human nature” when he was 28 of age.  He claims that he got the idea when he was 15.

The empiricist Hume (believing in experiments as the most valid method for acquiring knowledge) said:

“No philosophy will ever be able to take us behind the daily experiences or give us rules of conducts that are different from those we get through reflections on everyday life.”

For example, people have experienced or sensed wings on birds, but that does not mean that the complex idea of “angel” exists. Angels are associations in man’s imagination; thus, the concept of angels is false as an experienced reality and should be rejected from the knowledge baggage.

If a textbook does not offer any experimental reasoning concerning matter of facts and existence then it should be committed to the flames as a book of knowledge.

Hume wanted to know how a child experienced the real world. Hume established that man has two types of perceptions:

1. impression (immediate sensation) and

2. ideas of external reality.

Ideas are recollections of impressions.  For example, getting burned is not the same sensation as remembering getting burned: this would be a pale imitation of actually the stronger feeling of being burned.

Ideas can be simple or complex; we may form complex ideas of the world for which there is no corresponding “object” in the physical world such as angels or God. Each element in the complex idea was previously sensed and the mind constructed a “false object” if not actually existing for the senses.

Descartes indicated that “clear and distinct” ideas guarantee that they corresponded to something that really existed.

One example for Descartes affirmation is the ego “I”, which is the foundation for his philosophy.

Hume begs to differ.

Hume considers that the ego I is a complex idea and constantly altered.  Since we are continuously changing our alterable ego is based on a long chain of simple impressions that we did not experienced simultaneously. “These impressions appear, pass, re-pass, slide away, and mingle in infinite varieties of postures and situations.” It is like the images in a movie screen: they are disconnected single pictures, a collection of instants.

It is the same concept of Buddha (2500 years earlier). Buddha said “There is nothing of which I can say “this is mine” or “this is me””.  Thus, there is no “eternal soul” since “Decay is inherent in all compound things. Work out your own salvation with diligence.”  Hume rejected attempts to prove the immortality of the soul or the existence of God but he never ruled out their possible existence or that of miracles.

On his deathbed, Hume said “It is also possible that a knob of coal placed upon the fire will not burn.

A miracle works against the laws of nature; but again, we have never experienced the laws of nature.

All that we know results from “habit” of our experiences, such as witnessing relationship or “cause and effect” occurring many times, but that we can never say that it might happen “always”.

For example, adults are more awed by magic tricks than children: a child is no more impressed by an apple falling or just floating because he didn’t acquire the habit in his mind for natural occurrences.  Expectations lie in our mind and not in one thing following another.

We human are great in the task of cutting and pasting everything that impresses upon us. Hume says that the preconditions to assembling complex ideas is to have entered all the elements in the form of “simple impressions”.   If we imagine God to be infinitely “intelligent, wise, and good being” then we must have “known intelligence, wisdom, and goodness”.

(How man brought in the “infinitely” in his concept? Did it come from watching the sky as a substitute to the experience of infinity? Somehow, man is able to extrapolate on piece meal experiences).

Hume wanted “to dismiss all this meaningless nonsense which has long dominated metaphysical thought and brought it into disrepute.”  (The introduction of the term metaphysical gave terrible nightmares to the succeeding philosophers fearing that they might sound metaphysical and had to explain at great length their concepts).

Hume cut off the final link between faith and knowledge.

(I conjecture that the deficiencies of our perceptual senses provide rich sources of strong impressions that modify our view of the real world.  For example, when we see double for a while (a temporary affliction), or we feel the ground waving and shaking under our feet when drunk, or under the influence, or when we hear background noises, then these sensation are real first impressions and not just ideas.

Thus, the weaker our constitution, the more acute and varied are our experiences; the more adapted our brain for capturing associations the far more complex is our perception of the world.)


adonis49

adonis49

adonis49

July 2020
M T W T F S S
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
2728293031  

Blog Stats

  • 1,396,529 hits

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.adonisbouh@gmail.com

Join 742 other followers

%d bloggers like this: