the approach from antiquity in the way of existence is based on finding the meaning of being human and what separates man from other living things, and the answer is not based on the concept of "human essence". it is fixed as time and space as its essence; it is assumed that it is universal, that it is present in all future-coming people. but that they came from this quest and acceptance, "all people have the same qualities and are guided by the same core values." the blood is extremely meaningless. because what does it mean to be a human being and to distinguish us from other beings? " When we ask questions such as the answer, we will know, and depending on it is to have will. it is possible that we are not talking about the most general aspects of these concepts and the universality and the presence of every human being when we consider consciousness and will as human essence. alone, it can not be said that the consciousness and the functioning of the will in doing this acceptance, and the qualities that all the values that come to pass afterwards form. it is unlikely that they will be fixed in time and space in terms of the contents of their beings, with their consciousness and will in their existence, their presence in all mankind, and their universal character. in other words, a common consciousness and will can not be defined for all humanity in terms of their characteristics. as individuals, our consciousness and our willingness to use are separate from each other, and we may think that we decide how to use them.
We have an inheritance, a willingness to know. it is necessary to have an awareness beyond the awareness that arises from biological necessity. I will talk about what kind of a will, basically a kind of free will. it is liberty, not emphasis on independence here. freedom is constrained by borders by nature and always depends on circumstances. we can say that although we can not speak of an absolute and independent will in terms of what we possess as human beings, we have a will in the extent of our freedom. if they are to evaluate and then go beyond the consciousness of their consciousness, the definition of the essence can be made again. Before doing this, it would be appropriate to take a break from my conclusions and touch on the opinions of jean paul sartre on the subject.
contrary to the ideas of ancient philosophers, confronts the idea of creation with this idea that people's freedom is ignored, and associates existence with a purpose. the purpose of making something determines what and how it will be. if we briefly summarize the example given by Sartre for this, we would like to imagine a genuine paper knife used to open the envelope. this knife was made by a craftsman who had the idea of creating such a tool and had a clear understanding of what was required for that knife. it must have certain characteristics to fulfill its function and it must be done in certain ways in order to accommodate them. If the knife maker does not know what he will use for it, he will say that the blade will not exist.
so the essence, which is everything that the blade makes itself, comes before its existence. According to Sartre, we are the kind of people we are. there is no pre-made bill, in other words, it can not be talked about creation. we are, but this is because we have no purpose nor a self-conscience like a paper-knife; It is only that our existence comes before our own.
In Sartre's metaphysical understanding, human beings first exist and then define themselves
There are people and how they do it. Although human beings are not pre-determined, they are not simple and unconscious beings like human stone. Sartre defines human beings as "being for oneself", beyond being "self-existence", while defining beings that can not be changed, such as stone, to make a distinction in the concept of self, as "self-existence". is a conscious person and knows that it exists. so it is not up to human beings to give a pre-existing and unchanging self-fulfillment. man, with consciousness, is an entity with infinite change capacity; "What is not fool, what is not." you can not define it with what it is now. consciousness directs humanity to every perpetual future and freedom.
a distinction exists in the different worlds of man, the world of beings outside him, and other people, while anything exists in a simple way. sartre, edmund husserl, "consciousness is always aware of something else." argued that consciousness exists by acknowledging the existence of an object that transcends itself, with some participation in the argument. there is only transcendence in consciousness; there is no intimacy. consciousness does not create the world; the world is already on the ground of a being of love, which exists independently of consciousness. this manifestation is not independent of consciousness.
consciousness, an entity that is not consciousness itself is revealed.
When the essence of existence is mentioned, the first question to be asked in my opinion is, "What is the meaning of being?" the question is, let us take the paper blade of the birth of itersartre behind us. Was the existence of the blade dependent on the purpose of crafting it or thinking it? craftsman, when the blade did not know what to use, it did not occur in the thought of creation. it does not just do something; it is unlikely that something that emerges at the end of a completely random application process will later have a purpose of use. this should not be confused with the use of something existing in another way, except for the purpose of use. a conscious being, has the capacity to create something after an entrepreneur. if we think about the works done on artificial intelligence today, we can talk about the desire of man to create a conscious entity out of itself. this can be many things. can not one be a desire to be known, understood or recognized by the consciousness that man created himself? the possibility of creating a consciousness by another consciousness may be the possibility that a conscious entity possesses a predetermined substance such as a created, unconscious and simple being. that is to say, we, as human beings, have the desire to create a conscious being outside of ourselves, although we have not yet realized it, and that there is a conscious entity that wants to be discovered and discovered by humans. that the fragment considers the whole as if it were in a fractal; it may be a similar thing that the whole has manifested in the piece. a human philosophy, in order to tolerate the limitation of human intellect, constructs a concept of existence that projects life; in a divine philosophy, from the question of what kind of a whole is part of the limited will, from the question of endurance. The despair of sartre (generally of the anoine roquentin) was about to be a single drop in the sea of infinite judgment, with a limited will. in essence it has opened the path of a crippled philosophy. In other words, it is a cyborg that keeps people from being present, or the desire to leave it without breathing, based on the hub; the cadre has opened the way to an approach that denies Satan's rejection and his own-the-sketch in refusing to prostrate to Adam in the narrative. the cross that Jesus Christ carries on his back, the great rock of the sisyphos, the world on the shoulders of the atlas, and the multi-headed dogs who must watch forever at the numerous doors ... all of them, in fact, is the allegory of the feelings of conviction of the woman. honorable unhappiness, philosophical hopelessness, and splendid loss ... with limited consciousness and will, in fact, why he gave up; a person who falls into the world without knowing what he denies.
Thank you for reading%)>