How To Transfer Sshareaza

SPIRIT AND EXPERIENCE
NOTES FOR READERS Survived the Decline of the West (CONCLUDED)

IX

We have already mentioned the opposites of life and death, perception and knowledge, and act as a symbol and form, add couples become - now, moving - rest, clean - alien, soul - world leadership - space, time - time metric, will-knowledge, fate, causality, logic, organic - pure logic (also opposite logic of time and logic space), Physiognomy - systematic: that is almost complete the main ideas with which cuts Spengler practice in a given fundamental essence remains the same, whichever way it is approached.

I resist the temptation to make the presentation: the sudden, I embarrass the difficulties in Spengler evaded. Besides, anyone can reconstruct his philosophy: the diagram is simple. Just take the predicates' is in some sense, "becomes in a sense, to ignore minor differences in the form of expression, then combine each of the concepts mentioned with all the others, affirming the possibility of understanding all the concepts mentioned first in each couples, like all those mentioned in the second place, and denying any possible combination of a concept located in the first place with a concept located in the second place, we meekly obeys this pattern, we will automatically re-form the whole philosophy spenglérienne, and even something more, Sample: life ... is an object of perception is shaped, is a symbol, becoming, etc.. The causal relationship ... is dead, is an object of knowledge, has a law, is the now, etc.. Life has no systematic, destiny can not be object of knowledge, and so on. Spengler would see is the lack of rationality, I'm not saying anything.
should only cons the allegation that Spengler borrow too, without saying so, to Bergson, defend .... Bergson himself. In the latter, things are still different. But the bottom line: do not concern only Spengler and Bergson, he takes us back, beyond the romanticism of Goethe and German (also cited by our author), higher still.

X

Intuition is a problem in itself. I suggest that all German writers, for two years, refrain from this term. For it is at a point that anyone today wants to say something he can not or prove that he has not thought through, relies on intuition. And someone could post this truce used to illuminate the many senses of that term.
It would be a little more attentive to the fact, so readily overlooked today, that there are, on purely rational intuition. Again, some may have been methodical preparation, the decisive idea arises suddenly, as from without, before consciousness. Purely rational thought, that seems quite foreign to the feeling, can also be stimulated by intense emotional. How much more so the thought that we call ratioïde not here, the penetration and propagation velocity depend on just the inner vitality of words, kind of a cloud of thought and feeling which surrounds the core conceptual insignificant. That consideration also be given to such discoveries that "suddenly illuminate the life, triumphs of intuition ... But again, we see that it is not the sudden outbreak of a different kind of mental activity, but a state of all being, has long been in crisis, which turns abruptly, and where current thinking, presumably decisive, is usually only the flash of the explosion accompanies the general inner turmoil.
"Something that does not let know, define, describe [...] only feel and live within, we never understand but it is absolutely safe," "one fell swoop, from a single sense, we do not learn, which eludes any intentional action [...] which is manifested in its highest form with singular rarity, "wrote Spengler. This is a step in the large-scale, hence the state of the believer, lover, human ethics, leads to the "simplification" to video and other large beata forms of openness to the world, with a very interesting derivation disease, ranging from the banal to the most severe cyclothymia delusional states.
be objected that if this purely analytical attitude towards the intuitive process may be of interest to scholars who deal with these issues among themselves, the man himself, looking, much more than a form of psychological analysis, synthesis content it can buy. The world in which we live and we are involved usually makes emotional states and authorized reason, only the substitute of another world with which the true relationship was lost. It sometimes feels that none of this is essential, for a few hours or days, all this background of another fire behavior toward others and the world. It is straw and blows, shaking the world sphere. At every moment, all things new reborn; them as a immutable given would, one feels, dead inside. The horse pulling the car and the way forward. Or at least, man and man talk for more, does smell more like spies, they know how, in the same body, leg and hand. Such is the atmosphere of eclectic designers or philosophical statements. It can give an interpretation of Christian belated return to Heraclitean flux, extract or poke anything in the world, including a new ethos. But do we believe? No. We are in the literature. We galvanisons Buddha, Christ and other clouds. All around, the reason is unleashed thousands of horsepower. It defies; it claims to hold in a closed box, another authority. It is the "box to intuition." So let us open it once to see what it contains. Maybe a new world?
will not be found easily as beautiful and strong drafts shaping of these ideas than Spengler. But the richness of intuition lead ultimately to this: that most can never be said or treaty, which is is extremely skeptical in ratione (that is to say precisely what cons whose only virtue of being true!), but incredibly credulous with respect to everything that goes through your head that you put the math question better to trust these prostheses are the truth, history of art, culture and style, that we do, in the comparison and combination of data, despite intuition, exactly what the empiricist, and less well, drawing with smoke rather than bullets: this is the clinical picture of spirit degraded by the enjoyments too long on intuition, the wit of our time.

XI

The idea that cultures die by internal exhaustion is plausible, even outside of any metaphysical. That there can distinguish phases of development and consequential decline, too.
tension keeps the soul right and when it is no longer necessary and relaxes, the body collapses. We can not doubt it does go well in corporate life. These, therefore there is more driving forces to act on them, turn into shapeless masses.
Now all cultures are born in companies and relatively small areas, from which they spread. Hence a tendency to depletion and exhaustion, also accentuated the action time for generations. Ideas (non-ratioïde) do not allow themselves forward as knowledge, they require the same mental state, when the reality does the best that provisions similar psychic, so they are subject to change constantly. While they are still new, it can enrich and later, it corrupts them. Without doubt they have done in the meantime, institutions, forms life, but such a idea is already partially destroyed. Any achievement is deformation; old, ideas are becoming more and more incomprehensible empty. Is that the shape and the idea has a lifestyle very different: forms a layer oldest continually interfering on the ideas of a more recent layer, and compete with their influence.
These are some of the reasons for late periods are so heterogeneous, and cultures, in these times of civilization, so ready to crumble like mountains.

XII

The evolution itself is not something that occurs over a single line. Because, naturally, the idea is weakening as it spread, the influence of new sources of ideas interferes. The living core, the center of each era, vaguely seething mass, finds himself caught up in forms that are precipitated from times much earlier. The time is always present both here and far away, several millennia ago. It is a kind of worm that moves on the rings political, economic, cultural, biological and countless others, each has its own tempo, its own rhythm Doubtless can we present a unified and develop a perspective from a central reason alone, as does Spengler, but we may well be tempted by the opposite. There is no plan, no rationality, it is understood: is it really more unpleasant than if there were? Agnosticism is it comfortable? It may be true or false, penetrating or superficial, since it is a matter of right, but it is humanly profound or not, this is not a property of knowledge, but complex - not ratioïdes in Short my language - built on this kind of rational belief. This confusion has sort of dragged on, for example, in the evaluation of materialism (philosophical): it insists on judging the flat, narrow, when it may also be charged with emotion that belief in angels. Maybe going to understand now what you mean by the hope that such theories - unless they are specifically right or wrong - are not treated differently than mere speculation
for the development of intellectual a new life, rather than giving - as it never fails to do so today - in theory, if naively, so heavily, a character emotional. Reason intellectualism in the pejorative sense of the word, the current fashion of precipitation intellectual wilting premature thoughts? By the fact that we seek with our deep thoughts and feelings with the truth, and that without seeing this inversion, we're disappointed at any time should not succeed. Attempts ideological scale as that of Spengler are very beautiful, but they suffer from the fact that far too few opportunities inland were previously developed. Thus we reduce the global war, or our collapse, sometimes this group of causes, sometimes at another. It is an illusion, as misleading as to reduce a particular physical event to a chain of causes. In fact, when the first links, the causes are diluted ad infinitum. In physics, the concept of function has fared. In the realm of the spirit, we are disarmed. The intellect has left us stranded. Not because it is shallow - like everything else we had not also stranded! - But because we have not worked.

XIII

The distinction between culture and civilization is the subject an old controversy, in my view perfectly sterile. However, if one wishes to distinguish, I think it is best to talk about culture wherever there a single ideology and a form of life yet unitary, and define a civilization, on the contrary, as a state of diffuse culture. Every civilization has been preceded by a culture that decays in it; any civilization is characterized by technical mastery of nature and a complex system - which requires, but also consumes a lot of brainpower - of social relations.
almost always been attributed to culture an immediate relationship with the species, a security instinctive behavior and even be fatal, compared to which the understanding, the first symptom of civilization, present uncertainty and mediacy pretty miserable. We know the basis on which this design. On the one hand the grand gesture of myth and religion that, especially from a distance, an effect of all, on the other hand, the awkwardness of the understanding to express what a look, a silence, a decision reflected many better. The man, in fact, is not pure intellect: it is desire, feeling, unconscious and often simple fact, like the train of clouds in the sky. But finally, if one wants to see in him which is independent no reason, choose to place the nest or hive; for mythology, harmony and security intuitive ants and bees probably reduce to zero all that man can, on this level, rely .
As I said earlier, I would increase the number of people facing these problems because the main portion of the culture to civilization. It is clear that one does not impregnate millions of people as we infuses hundreds of thousands. The negative aspects of civilization to take much of the disproportion between the mass of society and its influences permeability. Consider reached the highest point before the war: railroads, telegraph, telephone, airplanes, newspaper, book, school system and post-school, military service: all this is absolutely insufficient. A difference between the city and countryside "black" greater than between races. Totally impossible, even at its own level, to access data from another domain unless intellectual enormous sacrifices of time. Consequence: a scrupulousness bounded or superficiality rampant. The intellectual organization is behind the increase in numbers: this is what we can bring back 98% of the phenomena civilization. No action can penetrate the social body over a long distance, or receive the backlash of all of it. It will be nice: Christ himself back down there on earth, it is absolutely impossible that it could act. The question of life or death: a political organization of the mind. This is the first issue of activism "as socialism. If not resolved, all other efforts will fail because it can be effective only upon its solution.

XIV

I summarizes, for the first time in my life that I have to do afterwards.
I attacked a book that has a great favor. I promised myself - not a record that I am, to denounce through this example shows the errors of our time: the superficiality, the spirituality that you cover yourself like a mannequin in a cloak; Overflow lyrical vagueness land of reason. Indeed, so great is that, for example, the difference between the "philosopher" explosive digested form of "condensation" everything that flows through the air from the spirit and the bookworm who devoured every day several times his intellectual weight, consuming the science he obviously can not make that form more loose, these are opposite phenomena, but identical in meaning: the symptoms of an era who can not use his mind. Not that she has too, as they say always, but it did not where it should. If, for another example, our time was exteriorized and unmarked, with expressionism, a form of artistic knowledge original, is that men who wanted to bring the spirit in the literature were unable to think. And if they were incapable, that they thought in terms which empty the contents were missing, and control experience. Naturalism has produced the reality that lacked the spirit, the spirit of expressionism which lacked the reality as one another, the "no-mind." But on the other side, with us, we immediately see a rise of rationalism dried fish: Both opponents are worthy of each other.
I return again to this distinction between ratioïde and non-ratioïde I, not invented, but only if ill-named. Here is the root of the problem of capital intuition and emotional understanding, which are nothing other than the specific, well understood, the area not ratioïde. Here is the key to the " education ". There were born of idealism rickety and the god of our time. And it is from there that would help us understand why the debate still sterile between scientific thought and the demands of the soul can not be resolved by a "plus" plan, orientation of work, a new assessment of science as literature!
And I said publicly Oswald Spengler, in token of affection, as if other writers make fewer mistakes than he is just failing to reach the bridge between the two sides, leaving them inevitably more space.

Excel Reverse Compounding Formula

SPIRIT AND EXPERIENCE
NOTES FOR READERS Survived the Decline of the West (CONTINUED)

VI

Objections the theory of knowledge are clearly admissible once accepted the need to know. But do we ever? See Emerson, Maeterlinck, Novalis - who I might add Nietzsche and, to quote a contemporary, Rudolf Kassner - gives the mind a very strong pulse, but we can not speak of knowledge, missing is the convergence to unanimity, the feeling does not leave condense precipitate we are faced with intellectual transcripts of something that man can indeed be acquired, but can only express by other transcripts of the same type.
The reason is that the representations in this field, have no constant meaning that all are more or less experiences, individual, that can not understand it only if recall similar. They demand to be relived every time, never are only partially understood and never permanently. This is true of all representations based not on the solid foundations of pure sensory and rational, but on feelings and impressions easily renewable. Of course, all manifestations of life skills related: any dialogue, any business of persuasion, decision, every relationship between two beings are, as they say, on the unknowns. Group does one of these representations and content sets of such (as do the test, the "opinion", the conviction "personal"), you get complex organisms, no less fragile, of course, that complex combinations of atoms.
Just entered this field, we see the logical dethroned. More thought is located, the higher the share of experience outweighs that of the intellect. That is why I once called the area "not ratioïde" (in Volume 4 of the magazine Summa which contain a few other occasional remarks about it) but it is valid, it goes without saying , in the sense mentioned above. In rigid concept replaces the representation breathable, the analogy to the equation, indeed the probability: the basic structure is more systematic, but creative. This area includes a range of shades: from quasi own scientific attitude to a test Taine or a Macaulay, as indeed, to most historians, to the foreboding, the arbitrary or the simple pulse generators that become some writings today. Thus, the contents of such works now offers a convergence going almost to unanimity, sometimes bordering on differences and not absolute disparate raising more than tendencies of thought waves and vibrations of the mind.
Anyone familiar with these books knows what order, analysis, comparison, in a word: thought is able to obtain, although the essence is lost as well, also knows everything hiding them in rationality, not to mention the obvious, without which no expression is possible. (I am excluding cases where the understanding alone occupies almost suddenly areas where previously only existed as an idea, or even literature, like psychoanalysis.) If it was, given the misunderstanding between current achievements in the field to those ratioïde not purely rational, science, a bit presumptuous, I would say that the intellect, where it is private, so to speak, of his ease, must show more flexibility and where everything is fluid, especially in its strict distinctions and definitions. This misunderstanding between mind and mind is sad, all these stories of rationalism and anti-rationalism may confuse the basic human problems, the only dream that we can do and where losses do not delete earnings, is the over-rationalism.
It does little to clarify these fundamental problems. The philosophers are not willing to methodically explore an area where the facts are actual events, most of them do not know enough diversity. So is he, to my knowledge, no attempt to analyze logical analogy and the irrational. "There is a scientific experiment and a living experience, Spengler wrote, there is something between life and see a difference too often underestimated. "Comparisons could be the happiness of historical thought [...]. The technique should be studied under the influence of an overall picture, therefore the need to exclude any idea of choice, until the control logic. "I admire this exciting project to require all new molds universal history of thought. If it fails, it's not just the fault of Spengler, that is also devoid of any preparatory work.

VII

Anyone who has realized that most of the thought may be, depending on the object or its conceptual apparatus, is the fluctuating nature of the experience , will understand the distinction that Spengler is not alone in understanding between living and dead knowledge, without any mystique. What we can learn about how school knowledge, rational order, objects and relations definable conceptually, it can be assimilated or not, forget or not, store or in our brains out as a cube squared containing dust with care: but such thoughts, in a sense, are dead, their validity outside of us is the reverse of the sentiment. The accuracy, precision kill and this which is defined, which is concept, is dead fossil, skeleton. As part of its concerns, a nothing-that-rationalist will probably never get to do the test. But in the realms of the mind where the principle: Knowledge = remembering - or, as I said once, Trinity Hegelian thesis-antithesis-synthesis, which is just not valid in the field where he ratioïde applied it - is an experience we are doing at any time. Here, the word does not designate anything fixed. It is a living word, rich with meanings and intellectual relations as it is impregnated will and feeling, an hour later, it tells you nothing, even though he says all that one can say concept. This kind of thinking deserves to be called alive.

VIII

Spengler wrote: "Analyze, define, arrange, divide by cause or effect, you can do it whenever you want. It's a job, the other thing is a creation. The shape and the law, and the concept of analogy, symbol and formula have very different bodies. It is the relation between life and death, and cause destruction, which appears here. The understanding, the concept kills "recognizing". He's recognized a fixed object, which allows to measure and divide. Perception drives. It incorporates the unique feel of a living unit. Poetry and historical research are related, such as computing and knowledge ... The artist, the historian sees how authentic it gets. He saw the future in the shape of the object in question. "
These remarks lead to a further distinction closely related to the living knowledge and understanding between dead or, as Spengler says, between perception and knowledge: that one day I called the distinction between causality and motivation. Causation rule seeks through regularity, and finds a chain; motivation is to understand the ground by releasing the impulse that drives him to act, feel, think along these lines. Can be based on that the above distinction between scientific expertise and experience living. I would note in passing, however, that the confusion so common between scientific psychology and psychology literature is often in these parts there. By 1900, all the writers wanted to be a "deep psychological sciences in 1920," psychologist "became an insult. That fight with chimeras. Because the causal psychology has never been widely used in art as to what is usually called psychology is simply the knowledge of men and the ability to motivate, not the knowledge of men's jockey, based a typology, but of the man to whom nothing has been hidden or spared.