جدال رامین قلی زاده با پرفسور کلی جیمز کلارک بر سر نتایج عملی نظریه
The controversy of Ramin Gholizadeh with Professor Clark
این گفتگو حول محور مساله شر بود و چرایی نتیجه عملی ندیدن از راهکارهای مطروحه بوده.
آیا کار فلسفه صرفا تولید اندیشه و تولید فکر است و در اصطلاح عامیانه فلسفه بافی است؟ یا اینکه هدف فلسفه از تولید اندیشه این است که ثمره و نتیجه ی عملی اندیشه ها را ببینند؟ آیا واقعا اینطور است یا نه ؟
پرفسور کلارک ظاهرا می گوید کار فلسفه حل چلنج های فلسفی و ذهنی است اما من مخالفم
Clark: why do they need a practical result? some versions of it are simply intellectual challenges. I asked you before--what do you mean by the problem of evil? there are lots of different versions and it's not clear from your abstract which one you are considering. Or why you think everyone else has been wrong.
there are at least two versions discussed here: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/evil/
there are, I think, many other versions
https://www.iep.utm.edu/evil-evi/
https://www.jstor.org/stable/41237364?seq=8#metadata_info_tab_contents
me : sir I really thanks for this and I have question
My definition:
Bad situations that man suffers from. And seeing bad things and suffering from it
And helping to reduce these evils. And I agree it's a intellectual challenge.
But limiting it to the intellectual challenge is wrong. Philosophical theories must also have practical implications. Is philosophy's job to produce theory? And just talk? Are we just solving challenges in our minds? Is philosophy just about presenting theory and solving intellectual challenges? And the practical result of the theories doesn't matter?
Clark: Philosophy has lots of jobs. One is to solve theoretical puzzles.
that's not the only job but not all philosophers need to do all jobs
Nicholas Wolterstorff's Lament for a Son addresses some of the practical stuff. Others, do, too.
me: and practical result?
Clark: you can solve the practical problem -- but I don't think that all philosophers need to or that philosophers don't care about the practical problem or that none has discussed the practical problem.
I'm eager to see what you think the practical solution is.
me: Humans create evil situations because of incorrect training
And man suffers from it.
This human suffering is important to me.
Holocaust. The atomic bomb in Hiroshima and other bad situations that hurt people. Whether physical or mental pain.
in my opinion
It is true that philosophy has a lot to do
But attention to human suffering must be a priority.
Why should man suffer?
A practical solution and an educational approach must be taken.
Neither religion, no philosophy, no logic, no planting, etc., can solve it and reduce pain.
As it has failedIn my opinion theories cannot alleviate human pain.
If we consider evil an intellectual challenge then will the human pain be resolved?
I think you not agree.
این بحث ادامه دار می باشد و باز هم ادامه ی این بحث را با پرفسور کلارک را به اشتراک خواهم گذاشت.
و اینکه پرسش و پاسخ و مباحثه ی من با پرفسور رایموند واناراگون را که در باب الهیات و وجود خدا می باشد را به اشتراک خواهم گذاشت.
با احترام رامین قلی زاده
درباره این سایت