Am lucrat anul trecut la o carte de filosofie pentru copii. Cartea cuprinde o serie de dialoguri imaginare cu o cititoare sau un cititor de 10-12 ani. Aici se gasesc doua discutii – una despre familie, alta despre obligatiile copiilor fata de parinti. Ele vin in continuarea unor reflectii din 2013, pe care le-am postat aici.
Also from last year (see previous post).
Some notes written about one year ago. I did revise them, but nothing is publishable.
E vorba despe o prezentare pe care am tinut-o în cadrul simpozionului Rațiune, Adevăr, Fericire, dedicat tricentenarului Leibniz (1646-1716), organizat de Societatea Leibniz din Romania, Societatea Română de Filosofie și Facultatea de filosofie a Universității din București.
Here it is:
You can read a bit more about it here (also in Romanian). In short, the book is meant to be used primarily by students taking an Introduction to philosophy course in order to develop their “conceptual tweaking” (or “conceptual hacking”) abilities by trying to solve several philosophical puzzles, organized by different topics. The book is in a way similar to 101 Philosophy Problems, which inspired me to undertake such an academic project.
This is mainly an (yet unsuccessful) attempt to develop what I understood as a Wittgensteinean suggestion here for how we could justify claims of the form ‘I know that p’, where p describes what is happening in the speaker’s environment, by performing certain empirical actions. Since these are my personal notes, some other thoughts are intermixed. If you have any feedback, please leave a comment bellow.
We are more inclined to say that a particular work of art has artistic value (and no other work of art, no matter how similar, could have the same value) and less inclined to say of a particular action that it has a moral value in itself, as a particular action. A kind of action has a moral value. Moral values are linked to generalizations in a way artistic values are not. Is there any justification for this?
These are some notes which I wrote down in the last few months. I was thinking of writing a book, so I wrote in order to make the topic of my book a bit more clear. This is the only use of this text – to make it clear for myself what I am supposed to write about in my book. The only result of writing everything found here, which I would acknowledge, is that the title of my book should be ‘Reason, Language and Actions’. Nothing else should be taken seriously, nothing is worth mentioning etc. I did not proofread the text for grammar mistakes. If you want to take a look at it, you’re on your own.
“Ce este familia?”
Intrebarea pare sa trimita la dictionar. Ce am putea afla mai mult, ca raspuns la aceasta intrebare, decat ce anume considera vorbitorii limbii romane ca este o familie, sau ce considera vorbitorii altor limbi ca este ceea ce numesc ei o familie?