Buradasınız

Akılcı İletişime Ulaşmada Kapalı Ahlakın Rolü: Bergson’un Akılcı-olmayan Ahlakında Akılcı İletişimin Olanaklılığı

The Role of Closed Morality in Achieving Rational Communication: The Possibility of Rational Communication Within Bergson’s Non-rationalist Morality

Journal Name:

Publication Year:

Keywords (Original Language):

Author NameUniversity of AuthorFaculty of Author
Abstract (2. Language): 
Based on Bergson’s The Two Sources of Morality and Religion, the paper attempts to investigate the role of closed morality in the achievement of rational communication. The claim is made that closed morality does not only have a destructive side but also a constructive side that may be present in achieving rational communication. Considering Bergson’s ideas about the plane of intellectuality, the author intends to find a place for rational communication within Bergson’s non-rationalist morality. Founded on the fact that closed morality and open morality are extreme limits and therefore cannot be found in a society in their pure form, the author claims that rational communication can be present in the transition stage between the closed soul and the open soul.
Abstract (Original Language): 
Bu makale Bergson’un Ahlak ile Dinin İki Kaynağı adlı eserini temel alarak akılcı iletişime ulaşmada kapalı ahlakın rolünü araştırıyor. Kapalı ahlakın yalnızca yıkıcı bir tarafının değil aynı zamanda yapıcı bir tarafının da olduğu ve bu yapıcı tarafın akılcı iletişime ulaşmada ortaya çıkabileceği savunuluyor. Yazar, Bergson’un zihinsellik düzlemi ile ilgili fikirlerinden yola çıkarak Bergson’un akılcı-olmayan ahlakında akılcı iletişime bir yer bulmaya çalışıyor. Kapalı ahlak ve açık ahlakın uç sınırlar olduğu ve dolayısıyla hiçbir toplumda saf halleriyle bulunamayacağı gerçeğinden hareketle yazar akılcı iletişimin kapalı ruh ve açık ruh arasındaki geçiş aşamasında bulunabileceğini iddia ediyor.
FULL TEXT (PDF): 

REFERENCES

References: 

BERGSON, Henri (1935) The Two Sources of Morality and Religion, translated by R. A.
Audra and C. Brereton. Notre Dame, Indiana: University of Notre Dame Press.
CHRISTOFLOUR, Raymond (1943) “Bergson et La Conception Mystique de L’art.”
Henri Bergson. Essais et Témoignages Recueillis par Albert Béguin et Pierre Thévenaz. Éditions
de la Baconnière. Neuchatel, p. 157-169.
HATZENBERGER, Antoine (2003) “Open Society and Bolos: A Utopian Reading of
Bergson’s ‘Final Remarks’.” Culture and Organization vol. 9 (1), March, 43-58.
KOLAKOWSKI, Leszek 1985 (2001) Bergson. South Bend, Indiana: St Augustine’s
Press.
MATTHEWS, Eric. (1996) Twentieth-Century Philosophy. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
MULLARKEY, John. (2000) Bergson and Philosophy. Notre Dame, Indiana: University
of Notre Dame Press.
POPPER, Karl. (1996) The Open Society and Its Enemies. Vol 1. London: Routledge and
Kegan Paul.
POWER, Carl (2003) “Freedom and Sociability for Bergson.” Culture and Organization
vol. 9 (1), March, 59-71.
VINCENT, Andrew (2005) “Nationalism and The Open Society.” Theoria: A Journal of
Social & Political Theory 107, 36-64.

Thank you for copying data from http://www.arastirmax.com