Meditations on First Philosophy (1641) and Principles of Philosophy (1644), main works of French mathematician and scientist Ren茅 Descartes, considered the father of analytic geometry and the founder of modern rationalism, include the famous dictum "I think, therefore I am."
A set of two perpendicular lines in a plane or three in space intersect at an origin in Cartesian coordinate system. Cartesian coordinate, a member of the set of numbers, distances, locates a point in this system. Cartesian coordinates describe all points of a Cartesian plane.
From given sets, {X} and {Y}, one can construct Cartesian product, a set of all pairs of elements (x, y), such that x belongs to {X} and y belongs to {Y}.
Ren茅 Descartes, a writer, highly influenced society. People continue to study closely his writings and subsequently responded in the west. He of the key figures in the revolution also apparently influenced the named coordinate system, used in planes and algebra.
Descartes frequently sets his views apart from those of his predecessors. In the opening section of the Passions of the Soul, a treatise on the early version of now commonly called emotions, he goes so far to assert that he writes on his topic "as if no one had written on these matters before." Many elements in late Aristotelianism, the revived Stoicism of the 16th century, or earlier like Saint Augustine of Hippo provide precedents. Naturally, he differs from the schools on two major points: He rejects corporeal substance into matter and form and any appeal to divine or natural ends in explaining natural phenomena. In his theology, he insists on the absolute freedom of act of creation of God.
Baruch Spinoza and Baron Gottfried Wilhelm von Leibniz later advocated Descartes, a major figure in 17th century Continent, and the empiricist school of thought, consisting of Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, George Berkeley, and David Hume, opposed him. Leibniz and Descartes, all well versed like Spinoza, contributed greatly. Descartes, the crucial bridge with algebra, invented the coordinate system and calculus. Reflections of Descartes on mind and mechanism began the strain of western thought; much later, the invention of the electronic computer and the possibility of machine intelligence impelled this thought, which blossomed into the Turing test and related thought. His stated most in 搂7 of part I and in part IV of Discourse on the Method.
脦苍 Les Passions de l鈥櫭e, Ren茅 Descartes 卯ncepe prin a face urm膬toarea precizare fundamental膬: din pricina finitudinii sale, doar omul are pasiuni. Dumnezeu e impasibil. Dac膬 omul ar fi o fiin牛膬 des膬v卯r艧it膬, n-ar avea, nici el, sentimente. Ar r膬m卯ne 卯n permanen牛膬 neutru 艧i distant, apatic. Din p膬cate, nu e.
Erudi牛ii vorbesc, desigur, despre 鈥瀖卯nia lui Dumnezeu鈥�, despre 鈥濻f卯nta M卯nie鈥�. Dar m卯nia lui Dumnezeu, a observat cu temei fostul c膬lug膬r augustin, Martin Luther, e numai un fel metaforic de a vorbi. 脦苍 definitiv, ceea ce s-a numit 鈥瀖卯nie divin膬鈥� reprezint膬 o atribuire uman膬. Dumnezeu nu are afec牛iuni. Nu iube艧te, nu ur膬艧te, nu are dubii, nu se mir膬, nu este bun, nu este r膬u, nu cunoa艧te m卯nia etc. Dumnezeu e supra-esen牛ial 葯i supra-pasional鈥�
脦苍 articolul LXIX, Descartes enumer膬 cele 艧ase pasiuni fundamentale. 艦i anume: mirarea, iubirea 艧i ura, dorin牛a, bucuria 艧i triste牛ea. Dou膬 cupluri polare 艧i 卯nc膬 dou膬 afecte izolate (de艧i mirarea poate trimite la dorin牛膬). Hexagonul pasiunilor poate fi reprezentat 卯ntr-un tablou, ceea ce istoricii filosofiei au 艧i f膬cut.
Toate celelalte afecte deriv膬 prin diviziune din numitul hexagon. Iubirea are dou膬 (艧i numai dou膬) specii. Prima e, fire艧te, iubirea intelectual膬 (amor intellectualis), de esen牛膬 pur contemplativ膬. A doua, iubirea-pasiune: ea este o emo牛ie a sufletului, precizeaz膬 Descartes, cauzat膬 de spiritele animale, 卯n continu膬 zbatere, care 卯ndeamn膬 voin牛a s膬 cear膬 sufletului unirea cu f膬pturile afine. Ura e sentimentul opus. Ea define艧te mi艧carea de 卯ndep膬rtare prin raport cu un obiect nociv.
Fiece afec牛iune, orice emo牛ie 卯艧i afl膬, p卯n膬 la urm膬, locul 卯n acest tablou cuprinz膬tor, de o geometric膬 preciziune 艧i distinc牛ie. Clasificarea e f膬r膬 rest. Din cele 艧ase r膬d膬cini afective originare (sau primitive) urc膬 prin bifurcare 卯ntreg r膬muri艧ul variet膬牛ilor derivate. Esen牛a tabloului e de natur膬 axiomatic膬. Descartes ofer膬 o ilustra牛ie definitiv膬 pentru puterea, for牛a 葯i stupiditatea imagina牛iei noastre.
Lo que este libro escrito hace aprox. 400 a帽os nos presenta, son uno de los primeros intentos de describir lo que son las emociones y sentimientos del hombre, en este caso llamada 鈥減asiones del alma鈥�, y si al d铆a de hoy con toda la tecnolog铆a y avances que ha logrado la humanidad nos resulta un poco complicado definir concretamente lo que es la ira, alegr铆a, deseo, arrepentimiento, etc. en ese tiempo sin conocer los procesos sin谩pticos del cerebro y su red neuronal, sin conocer acerca de los neurotransmisores, mol茅culas, etc. se ten铆an que basar en lo poco que conoc铆an del cuerpo humano, y ese es el m茅rito de este libro, que aunque el d铆a de hoy todo lo que dice carece de sentido porque ya somos m谩s expertos en materia biol贸gica, el intento de Descartes por darle una explicaci贸n biol贸gica y cient铆fica a los 鈥減asiones del alma鈥� como el las llama es de mucho m茅rito, se nota su esfuerzo por querer darle veracidad a esta 谩rea psicol贸gica que hasta el d铆a de hoy sigue causando debates por no ponerse de acuerdo, es aqu铆 donde radica la importancia del libro, no en lo que dice, ya que en la actualidad carece de fundamentos cient铆ficos, pero si en su importancia hist贸rica de ser uno de los primeros intentos en describir lo que hoy conocemos como sentimientos y emociones de manera cient铆fica, adem谩s de presentar argumentos atinados en algunas ocasiones y que al d铆a de hoy siguen estando vigentes.
Tutkular谋 yani insani duygular谋 harika bir 艧ekilde tan谋mlamas谋na ek olarak bu duygular谋n insan v眉cudu 眉zerindeki etkilerine de detayl谋 bir 艧ekilde i艧leyen "Ruhun Tutkular谋 / Passiones Sive Affectus Animae / Passiones Sive Affectus Animae", Descartes鈥櫮眓 dehas谋na bir kere daha tan谋kl谋k etti臒imiz 枚nemli bir eser. Zaman谋n谋n k谋s谋tl谋 艧artlar谋n谋 d眉艧眉nd眉臒眉m眉zde Descartes鈥櫮眓 duygu de臒i艧imlerinde insan v眉cudunda ya艧ananlar谋 bu kadar detay ve 莽o臒unlukla da do臒ru bir 艧ekilde anlatmas谋 ger莽ekten hayranl谋k uyand谋r谋c谋. Eseri okurken zaman a艧谋m谋na u臒ram谋艧 bu bilgileri arada bir sorgularken Descartes鈥櫮眓 bilim ve psikoloji alanlar谋na yapt谋臒谋 katk谋y谋 akla getirmek kitab谋n de臒erini 枚zellikle bu duraklamalarda y眉kseltiyor.
Yaz谋ld谋臒谋 tarih (1647) dikkate al谋nd谋臒谋nda zaman谋n谋n 莽ok 枚tesinde fikirler bar谋nd谋ran bir kitap. Bug眉n眉n bilgileri 谋艧谋臒谋nda "garip" gelecek pek 莽ok k谋sm谋 olsa da (oksijenin hen眉z bilinmiyor olu艧undan kaynaklanan eksiklikler)(zihnin ruh olarak ele al谋n谋yor olmas谋) ilgin莽 say谋labilecek pek 莽ok tespit mevcut. Descartes veya d眉艧眉nce tarihine ilgisi olanlara tavsiye edilir.
Apparently, The Passions of the Soul is the one thing you don't bring up in conversation to people who profess to love Descartes. It's a good idea to keep that in the back of your head. Having read it, I feel like I understand why.
I really can't tell if Descartes was a fan of the "speak with conviction" school of thought or if he actually did run some sort of experiment to see if these little "spirits" actually existed. That was the one thing that really bothered me. Maybe I should read some other sources to see how much of a biologist he actually was, but seriously, for all the cool things I didn't think he would know about human anatomy, every time he said "And then the animal spirits flow forth through the veins and open arteries allowing for more blood to enter the heart, causing joy and euphoria" I would start to tremble (which I now know can be caused by TOO MANY animal spirits in my veins, or TOO FEW! Thanks Descartes!).
I read a free version online, and it was translated extraordinarily smoothly, but I can't verify its accuracy. It certainly sounds like Descartes. But hey, the only reason why I read this is because it's one of the few philosophical texts I could get my hands on that deals with "Wonder" and I was not disappointed in that regard. Mostly regarding animal spirits. Still a really interesting text, especially Part I.
鈥炩€ejslad拧铆 啪ivot zakou拧ej铆 lid茅, jimi啪 afekty dok谩啪铆 nejv铆ce pohnout. Moudrost n谩m slou啪铆 p艡edev拧铆m t铆m, 啪e n谩s u膷铆, jak sv茅 v谩拧n臎 opakovat a jak s nimi nakl谩dat natolik zru膷n臎, 啪e lze snadno sn谩拧et zla, kter谩 z nich vzejdou, a dokonce z nich ze v拧ech 膷erpat radost.鈥�
Kr谩sn媒 spis o afektech, kter茅 za啪铆v谩me. Popisuje jejich propojen铆, jejich p艡铆膷iny, hodn臎 db谩 na popis fyziologick茅ho odrazu afektu v t臎le. P艡edmluva od Ond艡eje 艩vece je skv臎l媒m dopln臎n铆m a ujasn臎n铆m z谩kladn铆ch Descartov媒ch my拧lenek, p艡edev拧铆m jeho srovn谩n铆 se stoickou filosofi铆. Descartes byl v mnoh茅m pr暖kopn铆k a odv谩啪livec!
艩i Ren茅 Descartes'o knyga mechanicistin臈s pasaul臈啪i奴ros kritikams parodo, jog Descartes'o m膮stymas yra daug labiau niuansuotas, nei da啪nai suvokiama. D啪iugu, jog autorius 臈m臈si apm膮stym懦 apie iracionalyb臈s, jausm懦 sfer膮, skaitytojas tokiu b奴du pritraukiamas prie labiau subjektyvesnio prado. Knyg膮 pirma skai膷iau pranc奴z懦 kalba, ta膷iau v臈liau su啪inojau, jog leidykla Phi knygos perleido "Sielos aistras" 寞 lietuvi懦 kalb膮. I拧 prad啪i懦 buvau nusiteikusi skepti拧kai, laikiausi nuomon臈s, jog kai galima, reikia skaityti veikalus originalo kalba, ta膷iau 拧iuo atveju vertimas nei kiek netrukd臈 prisikasti prie teksto esm臈s. Be to, Jono Dagio 寞vadas pad臈jo puikius Descartes'o apm膮stym懦 apie emocijas pagrindus, tod臈l knyg膮 skaityti buvo malonu ir paprasta.
I princip en typologi p氓 k盲nslor och hur vi k盲nner igen dem i andra och oss sj盲lva. Kan rekommenderas som f枚rstabok f枚r personer som k盲nner att det 盲r sv氓rt att k盲nna igen beteenden och ansiktsuttryck.
Deel 1: Fysiologie van het menselijk lichaam. Bestaande uit (1) de bloedsomloop met het brandende hart als centrum en (2) het zenuwstelsel en de hersenen met de pijnappelklier in de hersenholten als centrum. Metabolisme produceert, via de lever, animale geesten die in de zenuwbanen terechtkomen en door het gehele lichaam bewegen.
Deel 2: De primaire passies, als effecten van materi毛le indrukken.
Deel 3: Alle overige passies.
Descartes' ethiek draait om het mechanistische karakter van de passies - we zijn onderworpen aan de materi毛le wereld en daarmee is onze ziel een ontvanger/waarnemer van indrukken. Tegelijkertijd kunnen we onszelf aanleren de indrukken te negeren of juist op te volgen, om bepaalde gewoonten af te leren of in te slijten. Hierbij is het verstand het criterium. Sto茂cijnse invloeden zijn overduidelijk.
Dit boek is de meest complete versie van Descartes' theorie van de mens en de passies. Het is ook, behalve de brieven van Descartes en Prinses Elizabeth van de Palts, het enige geschrift waarin hij een ethiek uitwerkt. Deze versie is ook erg verhelderend met een nuttige inleiding en aanvullende noten. Aanrader voor iedereen die in moderne filosofie is ge茂nteresseerd, hoewel het realiteitsgehalte van de fysiologische theorie毛n inmiddels ver onder 0 is gezakt.
Most of it concerns the main 6 passions of the soul that he identifies (love, sadness, joy, hate, desire, and admiration) and how the soul and body (strictly separate for Mr Descartes) interact with each other in expressing these; he provides detailed physiological demonstrations of each passion as well as elaborations on 鈥渘atural dispositions鈥� and other emotions (I.e. envy, greed, laziness, courage, glory, etc.) and how these supposedly relate to the passions of the soul.
Leibniz found this strict separation of soul and body to be problematic and unworkable because he discovered the law of the conservation of energy. How could the immaterial interact with the material and bring new energy into existence? For energy can only change forms, and can neither be created nor destroyed. To solve this, Leibniz came up with the monad.
2 stars because this is really only for the most dedicated of Descartes fans and was not especially inspiring.
For the era itself, it is a very good brainstorming and research over human feelings and souls. But it is not a sufficient work to read in today's world if you want to look for more scientific remedies for your passions and control them. Even though I haven't agreed with him about many stuff, I underlined a few parts. It was a great observation for me to examine the 16th-century mindset and how philosophers were working and thinking. It was like randomly reading a book that I'd found (and that church hadn't forbid) in a library in the 16th century.