Prof. Dr. Celal T\u00fcrer\u2019in bu haftaki dersi, her entelekt\u00fcel yolculu\u011fun ba\u015flang\u0131c\u0131n\u0131n bilgi ve d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnmedeki dinamizmi kavramaktan ge\u00e7ti\u011fini vurgulayan derinlikli bir ke\u015fif yolculu\u011fuydu. Zira bilgi ve d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnme s\u00fcreci statik de\u011fil, aksine insan\u0131 yeni ufuklara ta\u015f\u0131yan canl\u0131 bir ritme sahiptir. Bu noktada rasyonalite kavram\u0131, tekil bir kal\u0131ptan \u00e7\u0131karak farkl\u0131 rasyonalite bi\u00e7imlerini aramay\u0131 ve alternatifleri g\u00f6rmeyi gerektiren bir felsefi tutuma d\u00f6n\u00fc\u015f\u00fcr. Fikirlerin ancak hayat\u0131n pratik zemininde yer buldu\u011funda de\u011fer kazand\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ve tahkik a\u015famas\u0131na ula\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 belirten hocam\u0131z, ili\u015fkisellik \u00e7a\u011f\u0131nda ruh ve beden meselesinin h\u00e2l\u00e2 \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fcm bekleyen bir muamma olarak kar\u015f\u0131m\u0131zda durdu\u011funu ifade etti.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Erol G\u00f6ka\u2019n\u0131n felsefenin bedene mi yoksa ruha m\u0131 dayanmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi y\u00f6n\u00fcndeki sorgulamalar\u0131ndan, Medaim Yan\u0131k ve Recep \u015eent\u00fcrk aras\u0131ndaki modern psikoloji ile klasik nefs teorisi \u00e7at\u0131\u015fmas\u0131na kadar geni\u015f bir tart\u0131\u015fma alan\u0131 sunan hocam\u0131z, antik Yunan d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcncesinde ruh-beden meselesinin ba\u015flang\u0131\u00e7ta \u00f6l\u00fcms\u00fczl\u00fck ve \u00f6l\u00fcm sonras\u0131 varolu\u015f ihtiyac\u0131ndan do\u011fdu\u011funu belirtti. Pythagoras ve Empedokles\u2019in ruh g\u00f6\u00e7\u00fc inanc\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131n, Anaksagoras zihinsel y\u00f6n\u00fc temsil eden \u201cnous\u201d kavram\u0131na odaklanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Bu s\u00fcre\u00e7te Platon\u2019un \u00fc\u00e7 par\u00e7al\u0131 ruh anlay\u0131\u015f\u0131nda ak\u0131l, arzu ve \u00f6fke g\u00fc\u00e7lerini dengeleyen bir yap\u0131 ortaya konmu\u015f; Devlet diyalo\u011funda yer alan siyah ve beyaz atl\u0131 sava\u015f arabas\u0131 metaforuyla ak\u0131l bu iki g\u00fcc\u00fc dizginleyen bir s\u00fcvari olarak tasvir edilmi\u015ftir ve bu yakla\u015f\u0131m felsefe tarihini derinden etkilemi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Aristo ise ruh ve bedeni birbirinden ayr\u0131lamaz bir b\u00fct\u00fcn olarak g\u00f6rerek ruhu bedenin bir akt\u00fcalitesi \u015feklinde tan\u0131mlam\u0131\u015f ve t\u00f6z anlay\u0131\u015f\u0131n\u0131 bu birliktelik \u00fczerine kurarak felsefede realist bir d\u00f6n\u00fc\u015f\u00fcm yaratm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Epik\u00fcr\u2019\u00fcn atomcu ve materyalist ruh anlay\u0131\u015f\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131k, Plotinus\u2019un sudur teorisiyle ruhun \u00f6nceli\u011fini savunmas\u0131 t\u00fcm Orta \u00c7a\u011f d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcncesini \u015fekillendirmi\u015f ve \u0130slam filozoflar\u0131 \u00fczerinde kal\u0131c\u0131 izler b\u0131rakm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.
Kind\u00ee\u2019nin nefsi ilah\u00ee bir nur olarak g\u00f6rmesi, \u0130hv\u00e2n-\u0131 Saf\u00e2\u2019n\u0131n \u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fcn sadece beden i\u00e7in oldu\u011funu savunmas\u0131, \u0130bn Miskeveyh\u2019in ruhu ahlaki yetkinlikle ili\u015fkilendirmesi ve F\u00e2r\u00e2b\u00ee ile \u0130bn S\u00een\u00e2\u2019n\u0131n nefsin \u00f6l\u00fcms\u00fczl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fc faal ak\u0131l ve nurani bir cevher olma niteli\u011fiyle a\u00e7\u0131klamalar\u0131 bu gelene\u011fin zirve noktalar\u0131d\u0131r.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Modern d\u00f6nemde Dekart\u2019\u0131n ruh ve bedeni iki ayr\u0131 t\u00f6z olarak keskin bir \u015fekilde ay\u0131rmas\u0131, bug\u00fcn h\u00e2l\u00e2 tart\u0131\u015f\u0131lan psikosomatik problemlerin temelini atm\u0131\u015f; Kant ise bu dengeyi transandantal benlik \u00fczerinden yeniden kurgulam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. G\u00fcn\u00fcm\u00fcz felsefesinde art\u0131k klasik ruh kavram\u0131ndan ziyade, daima bir \u015feye ait olan \u201cconsciousness\u201d, yani bilin\u00e7 kavram\u0131n\u0131n \u00f6ne \u00e7\u0131kt\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 belirten hocam\u0131z, zihnin pasif bir makine de\u011fil; aksine Embodied Mind (zihnin bedensel yap\u0131yla ba\u011fl\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131), Embedded Mind (zihnin fiziksel ve sosyal \u00e7evreye g\u00f6m\u00fcl\u00fc olmas\u0131), Enactive Mind (zihnin eylem yoluyla d\u00fcnyay\u0131 in\u015fa etmesi) ve Extended Mind (zihnin ara\u00e7lar ve \u00e7evreyle kafatas\u0131n\u0131n d\u0131\u015f\u0131na uzanmas\u0131) olarak tan\u0131mlanan 4E teorisi \u00e7er\u00e7evesinde dinamik bir s\u00fcre\u00e7 oldu\u011funu vurgulad\u0131. Bu ba\u011flamda, Richard Swinburne\u2019\u00fcn \u201cAre We Souls or Bodies?\u201d sorusu ekseninde varl\u0131\u011f\u0131n mahiyeti yeniden tart\u0131\u015f\u0131ld\u0131. William James\u2019in ba\u011flant\u0131sall\u0131k vurgusu ve Alice\u2019s Adventures in Wonderland metaforuyla \u00f6zne merkezli bak\u0131\u015f\u0131n yerini a\u011f yap\u0131s\u0131ndaki ili\u015fkilere b\u0131rakt\u0131\u011f\u0131 bu yeni d\u00fcnyada, bizler e\u015fyan\u0131n kendisini de\u011fil, asl\u0131nda kurdu\u011fumuz ili\u015fkileri biliriz. T\u00fcrker K\u0131l\u0131\u00e7\u2019\u0131n zek\u00e2n\u0131n t\u00fcm varl\u0131\u011fa yay\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 y\u00f6n\u00fcndeki yakla\u015f\u0131mlar\u0131 ile \u0130bn\u00fc\u2019l-Arab\u00ee\u2019nin \u00e2lemi g\u00f6stergeler ve s\u0131fatlar\u0131n tezah\u00fcr\u00fc olarak g\u00f6rmesi aras\u0131ndaki paralelli\u011fe dikkat \u00e7eken hocam\u0131z, insan\u0131n bu bilgi a\u011f\u0131nda varl\u0131k kodunu bulmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fini ifade etti.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Antroposantrik bak\u0131\u015f a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan kurtulman\u0131n \u00f6nemine de\u011finilen derste, ahlak\u0131n k\u00f6keninin hayatta kalma ve birlikte ya\u015fama tecr\u00fcbesine dayand\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve makuliyetin ancak farkl\u0131 fikirlere ahlaki bir zemin a\u00e7makla m\u00fcmk\u00fcn olaca\u011f\u0131 belirtilerek ders \u015fu tespitle tamamland\u0131: D\u00fcnya tek boyutlu bir yer de\u011fil, t\u00fcm varl\u0131\u011f\u0131 birbirine ba\u011flayan devasa bir ili\u015fkiler a\u011f\u0131d\u0131r; bu ba\u011flamda ruh-beden ili\u015fkisi de indirgenebilir bir birlik ya da kesin bir ayr\u0131m olarak \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fcmlenmekten ziyade, felsefe tarihinde bir antinomi olarak varl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 s\u00fcrd\u00fcrmeye devam etmektedir.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Prof. Dr. Celal T\u00fcrer\u2019in bu haftaki dersi, her entelekt\u00fcel yolculu\u011fun ba\u015flang\u0131c\u0131n\u0131n bilgi ve d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnmedeki dinamizmi kavramaktan ge\u00e7ti\u011fini vurgulayan derinlikli bir ke\u015fif yolculu\u011fuydu. Zira bilgi ve d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnme s\u00fcreci statik de\u011fil, aksine insan\u0131 yeni ufuklara ta\u015f\u0131yan canl\u0131 bir ritme sahiptir. Bu noktada rasyonalite kavram\u0131, tekil bir kal\u0131ptan \u00e7\u0131karak farkl\u0131 rasyonalite bi\u00e7imlerini aramay\u0131 ve alternatifleri g\u00f6rmeyi gerektiren bir … <\/p>\n