Tip:
Highlight text to annotate it
X
The philosopher is always a step behind the questions and a step forward the answers.
Why philosophy has ended up on youtube? Why philosophy has ended?
Why philosophy? Why ?
"Why" means literally "through what" (perché), as if indicating a cause not in an originating
sense but one or more incidences that led to a path.
A path that is not going from or going to, but going through, a runthrough, a transit:
it is like an area of transition. So we begin to see this "why" as a territory
of passage, a passer rather than a past. And a passer-by, what passes, is always a
passion. And "passion" is the answer to: "why philosophy
has ended up on youtube? I really outdid myself when, for quite a while
now, I am convinced that philosophy should not and cannot be everyone's thing
it is: it is ALWAYS ALREADY. And I started calling symptom of intellectual
dissatisfaction that still common way of saying: "philosophy is for the few."
Because few are those who do not exclude themselves from their sensitivity and continually ask
themselves... ...few are those, in a society where we are
taught the opposite: *** ourselves, and the questions must
be asked to others. When there's something you do not know, ask
it. Or ask google.
Few are those who, not knowing something, do not ask to others but question themselves:
starting with why do they want to ask that question and why don't they know how to respond.
These people who are questioning themselves they are intellectually accustomed to a kind
of thinking which we call "disposed thought" and soon we'll see what that means.
Because of only random circumstances, these people find in themselves, before than in
the surrounding world, a companion of discussions, a self companion:
and, believe me, we're a dealing with a true other than self, it is one with which you
can find yourself in disagreement, you can argue.
Because thanks to the "disposed mind" these people are always uncomfortable on a certainty
and fail to think other than critically in a way increasingly contentious in itself.
The first society, the first friends , even the first sentimental relationship in these
people take place in themselves. To find out if you are, at least a little,
think about it: as a child, maybe in bed, did you plait the thoughts to build threads,
or maybe stories? Did you hug pathetically the pillow pretending
it was somebody and even imagined the feedback, did you create a story for him... a story
that was the story of yours, of you two? If yes, you have experienced a disposed thought.
And it is no coincidence that I said child, because disposed thoughts are thoughts out
of place, I mean not posed, but un-posed, come in,
and the less you know the world, the more you're a child, the more the thought is disposed.
But be back to the symptom of intellectual dissatisfaction that makes us say that we
inasmuch as intellectuals, we are an elite: I am philosophically convinced that children
are not more stupid than adults, but are potentially equally intelligent and
capable, and often more. They have a sexuality, an intellectuality,
a philosophy of life of their own... their very active imagination...
so what's missing children that makes them seem so children?
The capability of expression. The capability to share with others all this
wisdom of theirs. And if all these enunciated options are also
obtainable from an exclusive relationship with themselves,
the expression is eminently a faculty that is strengthened in knowing each other and
in knowing how to feel intentions. In this sense intentions, "intending to" are
tensing together in a common meaning that can never be the personal one from which the
expression has started, but a new one and conventional.
Conventional is convenient, coming together, coming to meet in step C, different from A
(where A is the meaning of the expresser) and B (where B the ability to feel the meaning
of the listener). In other words, there could be three different
meanings: the personal, the expressed and the acknowledged one.
And the kids are not so conventional, that's why they are so extraordinary.
That's why I dare to say that all the children are disposed thinkers, that is to say, all
the children are philosophers. But as such, unable to come to meet, unable
to be convenient, they have suffered a symptom that is always extant:
to feel intellectually dissatisfied, namely not satisfied.
To satisfie myself, is soddisfarmi in italian: I like to pretend that it consists of the
words "so - disfarmi", wich is "I can undo my self".
I know how to decompose myself, to divide myself in parts.
And this knowing how to divide myself in parts is what happens when you know how to partake
with others their intellectuality: partake and take part.
It means to divide, to shear off themselves into all three of those points,
feeling A, B and C. Often unable to do so, for the cultural circumstances
that we have mentioned, these intellectuals are closed in themselves,
and then accrue for experience the conviction of not convention, namely the conviction of
being alone and a few people in this world capable of philosophizing.
But we were all kids and just remember it, it's worth it, so that we can tend each other,
take care of each other and answer the question: " Why philosophy has ended up on youtube?".
Because, to irritate many "few people" with this answer, I'm just convinced that we are
all philosophers as we are all children; and it is worth popularizing this expression.
So I'll try to answer a little also to the question "why philosophy has ended?".
Precisely because the few remaining, supposed to be the only philosophers, have recognized
to be sterile and finally extinguished. At the last "Why?", which is like saying "why:
why?", I have already answered by pointing out that
"why" is not indicative of something original, but a route, a run-through (percorso).
But to your " Why?" which is at heart a "why" incorporating everything I said, a "why" that
I will never feed but I will starve forever... to this "why" for now I answer:
to remind us that we were all children.