Stefano Fontana, Verità o interpretazione

https://vanthuanobservatory.com/2025/10/22/linterpretazione-che-vuole-diventare-verita-i-guai-di-questa-pretesa-nel-nuovo-libro-di-fontana/

• Affermare il primato della conoscenza sull'interpretazione: Bisogna recuperare la convinzione che la ragione umana può conoscere la realtà così com'è. La conoscenza precede l'interpretazione; prima si conosce la realtà e poi ci si interroga sul suo senso, non viceversa.
• Tornare al primato dell'essere sulla coscienza: La realtà e l'essere vengono prima della nostra coscienza e del nostro pensiero. L'ermeneutica moderna, come tutta la filosofia moderna, inverte questo ordine, partendo dal soggetto e dalla sua prospettiva.
• Restaurare la metafisica come fondamento: Senza una solida base metafisica, ogni discorso teologico o morale è destinato a diventare storicistico. È la metafisica che permette di pensare a verità stabili, a una natura umana e a una legge morale universale.
• Distinguere tra rivoluzione e sviluppo omogeneo: Fontana insiste sulla necessità di distinguere un legittimo approfondimento della dottrina (sviluppo omogeneo) da un suo rovesciamento (rivoluzione). L'ermeneutica moderna, mascherandosi da sviluppo, opera in realtà una rivoluzione.

Epistemology is not a single question ("What is knowledge?"), but a constellation of inquiries:

What can we know? How do we know? Why do we believe? What should we believe?And — can we ever be sure?

Epistemology does not exist in isolation. Because it concerns how we know and what it means to know, it touches nearly every other domain of philosophy (and even beyond). For instance:

a. Metaphysics

• Relation: Epistemology and metaphysics are twin pillars of philosophy.

• Epistemology asks how we know what exists; metaphysics asks what exists.

• Examples of overlap:

• Realism vs. idealism: Can the mind know reality as it is, or only its own representations?

• The problem of universals: How do we know abstract entities?

• Personal identity and self-knowledge: How do we know who we are?

b. Logic

• Relation: Logic studies valid reasoning — the formal structure of justification.

• Connection:

• Epistemology uses logic to model rational belief and inference.

• Topics like deduction, induction, abduction, and fallacies directly shape epistemic justification.

c. Philosophy of Mind

• Relation: Knowledge depends on mental states — belief, perception, consciousness.

• Shared questions:

• What is belief? What is awareness?

• How do perception and introspection yield knowledge?

• Can unconscious or implicit cognition count as knowledge?

d. Philosophy of Language

• Relation: Much of our knowledge is mediated by language.

• Connections:

• Meaning, reference, and truth conditions affect what we can know through statements.

• Theories of testimony, communication, and semantic externalism (Putnam, Kripke) reshape epistemology.

e. Ethics

• Relation: There are norms of believing just as there are norms of acting.

• Connections:

• "The ethics of belief" (Clifford, James): Is it immoral to believe without evidence?

• Virtue epistemology parallels virtue ethics — focusing on intellectual character (honesty, humility, courage).

2. Applied and Specialized Areas

a. Philosophy of Science

• Relation: A central applied field of epistemology — how scientific knowledge is formed, justified, and revised.

• Topics:

• Observation and theory-ladenness

• Induction and falsification (Hume, Popper)

• Scientific realism vs. instrumentalism

• Paradigms and revolutions (Kuhn)

b. Philosophy of Religion

• Relation: Religious belief raises unique epistemic questions.

• Topics:

• Faith vs. reason

• Religious experience as a source of knowledge

• Arguments for God's existence as epistemic justification

• Reformed epistemology (Plantinga): belief in God as "properly basic"

c. Aesthetics

• Relation: Can we know beauty or artistic value?

• Connections:

• The role of perception, intuition, and imagination in aesthetic judgment.

• "Aesthetic knowledge" — insight through art, poetry, or music.

d. Political and Social Philosophy

• Relation: Knowledge has a social and political dimension.

• Connections:

• Epistemic injustice (Fricker): how power silences or discredits knowers.

• Deliberative democracy: collective reasoning and public truth.

• Propaganda, misinformation, and epistemic trust.

e. Cognitive Science and Psychology

• Relation: Empirical study of how humans actually form beliefs.

• Shared concerns:

• Bias, heuristics, memory errors.

• Cognitive reliability and bounded rationality.

• The naturalization of epistemology (Quine).

f. Artificial Intelligence and Computer Science

• Relation: Epistemic logic and knowledge representation underpin AI reasoning.

• Topics:

• What does it mean for a machine to "know"?

• Formal models of knowledge, belief, and uncertainty (Bayesian, epistemic logic).

• Epistemology of algorithms — how systems justify their outputs.

g. Education and Pedagogy

• Relation: Epistemology shapes theories of learning.

• Connections:

• Constructivism vs. realism in education.

• How students come to know — epistemic development.

• Critical thinking as applied epistemic virtue.

⸻

3. Cultural, Historical, and Interdisciplinary Connections

a. History of Philosophy

• Every major philosopher has a distinctive epistemology:

• Plato (recollection), Aristotle (abstraction), Aquinas (illumination + sense realism),

• Descartes (rational certainty), Locke (empiricism), Kant (conditions of knowledge),

• Hegel (historical consciousness), Husserl (phenomenology).

b. Anthropology and Sociology

• Relation: Cultural ways of knowing differ — epistemology becomes comparative.

• Topics:

• Indigenous epistemologies and oral knowledge systems.

• Social construction of "truth."

• Epistemic pluralism and decolonial thought.

c. Linguistics and Semiotics

• Relation: Knowledge depends on signs, interpretation, and meaning.

• Connections:

• How symbols mediate experience.

• Semiotic theories of understanding (Peirce, Eco).

d. Theology

• Relation: The question of faith and reason, revelation, and divine illumination.

• Key areas:

• Augustinian and Thomistic theories of knowledge.

• The "lumen fidei" (light of faith) as an epistemic principle.

• Mystical and apophatic epistemologies (knowing by unknowing).

4. Meta-level and Emerging Fields

a. Metaepistemology

• The study of epistemology itself:

• What kind of normativity governs knowledge?

• Is epistemic justification objective, contextual, or pragmatic?

b. Epistemology of Ignorance

• Studies how ignorance is structured and maintained socially or politically.

c. Epistemic Logic and Game Theory

• Formal analysis of "who knows what" in interactive contexts — crucial in AI, economics, and decision theory.

In summary: Epistemology sits at the crossroads of philosophy — touching metaphysics, ethics, mind, science, and culture.

If philosophy asks What is? (metaphysics), What ought we to do? (ethics), and What is beautiful? (aesthetics),

then epistemology asks the question that underlies them all.

⸻

• The main problems facing us today:

Affirming the primacy of knowledge over interpretation:

We must recover the conviction that human reason can know reality as it truly is. Knowledge precedes interpretation; first we know reality, and then we inquire into its meaning—not the other way around.

Returning to the primacy of being over consciousness:

Reality and being come before our consciousness and our thought. Modern hermeneutics, like modern philosophy as a whole, reverses this order by starting from the subject and from his perspective.

Restoring metaphysics as the foundation:

Without a solid metaphysical basis, every theological or moral discourse is destined to become historicist. It is metaphysics that allows us to think of stable truths, of a human nature, and of a universal moral law.

Distinguishing between revolution and homogeneous development:

Fontana insists on the need to distinguish between a legitimate deepening of doctrine (homogeneous development) and its overturning (revolution). Modern hermeneutics, while disguising itself as development, in reality carries out a revolution.

iPadから送信

Edward Feser, Aristotle’s Revenge

Edward Feser, Aristotle's Revenge

Actuality and potentiality, substantial form and prime matter, efficient causality and teleology are among the fundamental concepts of Aristotelian philosophy of nature. Edward Feser, Aristotle's Revenge argues that these concepts are not only compatible with modern science, but are implicitly presupposed by modern science. Among the many topics covered are the metaphysical presuppositions of scientific method; the status of scientific realism; the metaphysics of space and time; the metaphysics of quantum mechanics; reductionism in chemistry and biology; the metaphysics of evolution; and neuroscientific reductionism. The book interacts heavily with the literature on these issues in contemporary analytic metaphysics and philosophy of science, so as to bring contemporary philosophy and science into dialogue with the Aristotelian tradition.

Immortal Souls

Immortal Souls provides as ambitious and complete a defense of Aristotelian-Thomistic philosophical anthropology as is currently in print. Among the many topics covered are the reality and unity of the self, the immateriality of the intellect, the freedom of the will, the immortality of the soul, the critique of artificial intelligence, and the refutation of both Cartesian and materialist conceptions of human nature. Along the way, the main rival positions in contemporary philosophy and science are thoroughly engaged with and rebutted. Reviews "Edward Feser's book is a Summa of the nature of the human person: it is, therefore, both a rather long – but brilliant – monograph, and a valuable work for consultation. Each of the human faculties discussed is treated comprehensively, with a broad range of theories considered for and against, and, although Feser's conclusions are firmly Thomistic, one can derive great benefit from his discussions even if one is not a convinced hylomorphist. Every philosopher of mind would benefit from having this book within easy reach." Howard Robinson, Professor Emeritus of Philosophy, Central European University "Feser defends the Aristotelian and Thomistic system, effectively bringing it into dialogue with recent debates and drawing on some of the best of both analytic (Kripke, Searle, BonJour, Fodor) and phenomenological (Heidegger, Merleau-Ponty, Dreyfus) philosophy. He deftly rebuts objections to Thomism, both ancient and modern. Anyone working today on personal identity, the unity of the self, the semantics of cognition, free will, or qualia will need to engage with the analysis and arguments presented here." Robert C. Koons, Professor of Philosophy, University of Texas at Austin.

James Dominic Rooney
Material Objects in Confucian and Aristotelian Metaphysics: The Inevitability of Hylomorphism

Hylomorphism is a metaphysical theory that explains the unity of material objects through a special immaterial part, a 'form'. While contemporary accounts of hylomorphism appeal to structure, and advocate that material substances can have other substances as parts, James Dominic Rooney highlights the flaws in this Neo-Aristotelian way of thinking. Instead, he draws on medieval European and Chinese traditions to put forward that the classical approach to the unity of material objects in terms of 'form' remains theoretically superior.

Rooney shows how Thomas Aquinas' account of form gives a more coherent version of hylomorphism, eliminating the need for substance parts. He also studies the Song dynasty Confucian thinker Zhu Xi's hylomorphic intuition that whatever accounts for the composition of some parts into a material whole is a metaphysical part of that object. By appealing to the same non-Aristotelian considerations as Zhu Xi, Rooney explains why all those who believe in the unity of material objects will appeal to a form, enabling hylomorphism to remain a plausible framework. In doing so, this book shines new light on a classic philosophical problem in contemporary metaphysics and demonstrates the far-reaching points of theoretical contact between Western and Confucian thought.



iPadから送信

Music

"Bach tells us what it's like to be the universe, Mozart tells us what it's like to be human, and Beethoven tells us what it's like… to be Beethoven."

iPadから送信

About "being on the right side of History"

St. Augustine would be very wary of the modern slogan "be on the right side of history."

While he certainly believes that history is under divine providence, he sharply rejects the idea that any earthly political movement can confidently identify itself with history's final moral verdict.

His mature view—especially in De civitate Dei (The City of God)—cuts in a quite different direction from Hegelian or progressive readings.

⸻

1. Providence, yes — but not worldly inevitability

Augustine holds that:

• God governs history.

• Events unfold according to providence.

• History has an ultimate end in the Last Judgment, not in political or social progress.

But for Augustine:

• humans do not have transparent access to God's plan,

• and no empire, party, or reform movement can claim to embody history's destination.

So he would resist the idea that one can now declare:

"we are the side that history will vindicate."

That sounds, to him, like presumption.

⸻

2. Two cities, intermingled in time

In City of God (Books XI–XVIII especially), Augustine distinguishes:

• the City of God (defined by love of God to the contempt of self),

• the earthly city (defined by love of self to the contempt of God).

These two "cities" are mixed together throughout history; you cannot simply map them onto particular states, factions, or eras.

That makes any easy appeal to "history's right side" suspect: history is not a straightforward moral sorting machine before the end.

⸻

3. Against triumphalist progress narratives

Augustine wrote partly to rebut Roman claims that Christianity had disrupted the Empire's destiny. He dismantles the pagan idea that Rome's history revealed divine favor and also avoids Christian versions of imperial triumphalism.

For him:

• empires rise and fall for complex reasons,

• worldly success is not a reliable sign of righteousness,

• suffering does not mean being on the "wrong side."

This undermines the assumption that historical outcomes themselves certify moral correctness.

⸻

4. Where Augustine does locate judgment

Augustine would relocate the moral tribunal:

• not to future generations,

• not to the arc of social development,

• but to God's final judgment.

Human history can show patterns and lessons, but its ultimate meaning is eschatological, not progressive.

⸻

📌 In brief

If Augustine heard someone say "we're on the right side of history," he would likely respond:

• ✔️ History is governed by God.

• ❌ But you cannot equate any present cause with history's final verdict.

• ❌ Do not infer righteousness from success or inevitability.

• ⚖️ Live justly now, in humility, leaving ultimate judgment to God.

iPadから送信

AI limits

https://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/handouts/Fowler-AI_Chap7.pdf

Two methods for learning Latin

1. Intensive, iterative approach, with lots of repetition and exercises
   
2. Comprehensible input. Learning from extensive pleasure reading
   

ラテン語を学ぶための二つの方法

1️⃣ 集中的・反復的アプローチ

多くの繰り返しと練習問題を通して学ぶ方法。

2️⃣ 理解可能なインプット（Comprehensible Input）

楽しく大量に読む「多読」によって自然に学ぶ方法。

iPhoneから送信

Library: Select a book and dive in. - Fabulae Faciles

https://www.fabulaefaciles.com/library/books

iPadから送信

Ecco una traduzione in giapponese, pensata per mantenere il tono poetico…

Ecco una traduzione in giapponese, pensata per mantenere il tono poetico-orante di Mario Luzi, evitando sia un registro troppo tecnico sia uno eccessivamente colloquiale.

⸻

**存在よ、

私の内に、しかもこの私の内に在ってくださることを感謝します。

どこにでも在り、しかもご自身の内にとどまりながら、

永遠にご自身を流れ広がらせておられる方よ。

私はあなたの力が力として働くのを感じます。

広大なものの中に、深奥の中に、

また狭く裂けた亀裂の中にまで震え動いているのを。

無はあなたを取り囲みますが、決して飲み込むことはできません。

私がそこから排除されていないことを感謝します。

それはあなたの欠落によるのでもなく、

私自身の無に等しい小ささによるのでもありません。

アーメン。**

⸻

注（簡潔に）

• Essere → 存在よ

→ 神名を避けるルツィの哲学的・詩的選択を保持。

• vigore vigere → 力が力として働く

→ 日本語では重複を意味で再現。

• angusto cretto → 狭く裂けた亀裂

→ 「裂け目・ひび」の実存的ニュアンスを重視。

• nullità → 無に等しい小ささ

→ 単なる「無」ではなく、被造物的無力さを示唆。

ご希望でしたら、

• 典礼的日本語（祈り用）

• より哲学的な訳

• 朗読に適したリズム重視版

のいずれかにも書き換えます。

iPadから送信

Inedito

Essere, grazie che sei in me, anche in me, tu che sei dovunque e in te stesso perpetuamente ti diffondi. Sento il tuo vigore vigere nell'ampio e nel profondo vibrare nell'angusto cretto il niente ti assedia e non ti travolge. Grazie che non ne sono escluso né per omissione tua né per mia nullità. Amen.
Article Name:L'inedito
Publication:Corriere della Sera
Author:di Mario Luzi
(dal Fondo Mario Luzi dell'archivio Bonsanti)

iPadから送信

Old Testament Story Line | ScriptureCentral

https://scripturecentral.org/archive/media/chart/old-testament-story-line

iPadから送信