tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6294744150606571617.post5544125222601028317..comments2024-01-16T07:07:11.166-08:00Comments on Bridal Pearl Necklace : Wedding Pearl Jewelry: Pearl Necklacehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01857152720762307589noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6294744150606571617.post-19985201540365735942019-12-29T21:11:22.481-08:002019-12-29T21:11:22.481-08:00The threat -- because they represent to all
other ...The threat -- because they represent to all<br />other areas of knowledge like a constant threat; of course, no<br />the deductive Sciences, nor the empirical Sciences, nor philosophical<br />reflection, as long as they remain in its own dimension, not<br />risk "to move into the camp of" Humanities or "spot" yourself<br />their epistemological impurity; but we know what<br />sometimes we have difficulties in establishing those interim<br />levels that connect to each other these three dimensions<br />epistemological space. The fact that the slightest<br />deviation plane these levels pushes the thought to the area<br />taken by the Humanities, and hence the danger of "psychologism",<br />"sociology", -- in short, everything "anthropologism.",<br />that becomes especially threatening when, for example, <br />are understood properly, the relations of thought to formalization or<br />when not subjected to the necessary analysis of the modes of being of life,<br />labour and language. "Anthropological" in our days is the biggest<br />internal danger for knowledge. Sometimes hastily think<br />people are already free from himself, as soon as he found out<br />that is neither the center of creation, nor the center of the space,<br />neither the ultimate goal of life; but though man is no longer a king in<br />world Kingdom, although he has already more and not worth the focus<br />being, anyway, the Humanities -- it's a dangerous intermediaries in<br />the space of knowledge. However, in fact itself is doomed<br />their some kind of significant instability. And this, in turn,<br />explains that all the complexity of "the Humanities", their fragility,<br />their lack of confidence in its scientific character, their dangerous flirtation with<br />philosophy, their vague reliance on some other areas<br />knowledge, their character -- is always secondary and derivative, however,<br />a claim to universality, - that all of this is not, as often<br />I think the consequence of any particular density of their object; the reason<br />that is not a metaphysical status, not insurmountable<br />the transcendence of the person they're talking about, but all<br />the complexity of the epistemological configuration in which they<br />were placed, their constant relation to those three<br />the dimensions in which they find their own space.Pearl Necklacehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01857152720762307589noreply@blogger.com