[Possibility claims that] everything is possible that does not contradicts itself. [Contrariwise, all things are just as much contradictory and hence impossible. (...) [Possibility is posited] to be disproportionate with respect to the absolute form. Possibility is in itself (...) as not to be in itself. Internally, therefore, - since it states to be possible what is without contradiction -, possibility is contradiction, or it is impossibility. // [our commentary: Possibility (what is possible is not yet actual, it doesn't exist yet, so that it is the opposite of what it is; and that which actually exists isn't what it isn't but will be; something is actual, inasmuch as it was what it isn't) is something that is to be the opposite of what it is. Contradiction is solved, whenever it is overwhelmed so that the solution between the two is just the possible - means, the non-contradictory - differential of the two opposites as against all the infinitely conceptual combinations that serve the porpoise of being non-contradictory. The analytical solution of contradiction designates the process of solving a contradiction without resource to elements besides the two opposites and its deductive or inductive sequence. Otherwise, it must be called synthetic and it uses either deductive or inductive stages besides the original deductive or inductive reasoning sequence. Both A is A and ¬A is ¬A are possible: possibility consists in the connection comparing the two, a reflection of the totality, which implies that the opposite also is possible [◇ A  ∨ ¬A; but it doesn’t amount to either modally claim that □ A ∧ ¬A or simply that A  ∧ ¬A – it is impossible, so that we express it as A  ∨ ¬A. So, Hegel is not saying that both A ∧ ¬A are possible in actuality (being in conjunction; however, they are possible as a dis-junction, in pure possibility: A ∨ ¬A. Here, in Aristotelian terms, we must establish a correlation between actuality and conjunction of contraries and possibility as dis-junction of contraries, as well as actual possibility just as dis-junction of contraries. Therefore, the conjunction of the conditions of possibility and actuality gives us only one result - either A or ¬A].

Hegel, Science of logic, §  11.382 (rephrased and commented) 

De facto, é possível que cada um de nós, se bem que conheça tudo sob a forma de um sonho, volte de novo a ignorá-lo, como se acordasse.

In O Político, 277d (Platão).

Uma arte não é um método pronto para fazer algo acabado, mas simultaneamente, um método de melhorar sempre o seu método.

Husserl,  §9, in A crise das ciências europeias e a fenomenologia transcendental

A reflexion towards Feyerabend’s Farewell to Reason

Paul Karl Feyerabend ensues to be the sort of out of the ordinary irreverent philosopher, which is plenty of contradictions and triggers his readers’ awkwardness, although this present work would rather be classified as a short-tempered and tense juxtaposition of small essays which, in its best, could had a better impact, if its author wouldn’t deplete his munitions of straw man representations of science, philosophy and arts. I assume that the very point it makes and, at least, his work, would be of great value would be much more satisfying, if the author would never classify his colleges and readers as academic scroungers; its own work is itself contradictory, since he knocks out everyone who may sustain a different point, and doesn’t itself admit criticism, because he is not, as we says, a reasonable writer – instead, it befalls rational and logical comprehension of world, giving up on his fallacious attempts to detreat upon – and not from – others what we actually does, just because he isn’t reasonable – this point transforms his own position in a critique to the very intervention and intercultural dialogue, founded in the sign of variety – a multiplicity which, I admit, till the present moment, not only is not guaranteed, owing to the fact it hasn’t been accomplished in western and specially European history, but also in nowadays. Even so, this standpoint, being unable to account for debate and consisting in a coarctation of human action and consideration of his acts, would create a meta-historical writer, which tries to keep itself beyond bias – a foregone conclusion he implicitly tries to deny he upholds, indorsing this outlook in his criticisms to Popper and other authors (which I would better appreciate, if there wasn’t so many ad hominins! Indeed, this could never be achieved, since all we born in a cultural-biased world vision; in fact, he is trying to make his point, without considering others and obliterating the very culture path he eventually was trying to stand up for. As a result, we can’t affirm his ideas for we advise readers that doing anything – even denying his argumentation – from reflection upon his words would be impervious! But since we are citizens and our pollical institutions couldn’t stand as democratic, as long we can’t adopt our characteristically societal disparity from other ethnicities – the democratic world we envisaged in Greek culture and, as relativistic may agree, wouldn’t be superior to any other nor inferior, and, as a result, it consists in an idiosyncrasy that shall never be eliminated (the obliteration of memories would cause an aberration – the dilapidation and annihilation of our patrimonial fountainheads as humans, the mistreatment to the right for memory, because we must foment diversity and recognize it from our culture, and not as an stranger talking as a prophet, like some stylistic twists in Feyerabend’s book. Consequently, the problem is – and Feyerabend adopts a pattern with we couldn’t refuse it is the stain of his very own culture, since it considers problems –, therefore, how to foment diversity in world culture backdrop, without a reliance in homogeneous and inhuman methodology (and that is one of the greatest lessons we could learn about the view Paul Feyerabend gives us, although we denies: that is, in the treatment of our very own culture and social organization, we must seek for a methodology which allows diversity and respect to human diversity: and it only could be done if we take the time we need to reflect and try to surpass the intolerable standardization and velocity of our society: instead, we must not neglect science as something, which was to do which our western culture and it is important was well as other cultural traditions, but instead think how the democratization of education could be less dogmatic and more critical; in fact, Paul Feyerabend cannot forget our history and that his knowledge came from a tradition would had been lost, if it didn’t pass to us; so if we don’t give or foresee to provide education for our children, democratically – reserving it just for a minority as Feyerabend suggests in is argumentative path – in fact, we thinks education couldn’t extend his limits to the citizens that born as members of a western tradition (I agree that we can't destroy autochthonous structures, a point which I totally agree with), considering intellectuals and educated people as a minority –, it would eventually create more permeable citizens (that is, people which born in western culture) without tools to think for themselves and – throwing light to this truism – to consider Feyerabend words and its very point – however, the author disrepairs his culture and rather thinks that we must assume that other cultures are superior to our owns (they, in fact, have the same value) and that we must take some practices from them, instead of recognizing that this very solution was the one likewise we criticized (we denies we should share our cultural practises with others, because it would be a imperialist view; I agree we should be aware to the imperialism western tries to adopt, but I don't agree that we should forget our culture; I think that balance is required); so, our schools could be improved, but we should consider that reading, learning, intellectual work, which Paul Feyerabend had done, are taken from the very nature of our culture and we shall never try to forget this. So, nonetheless, my balance is that the indignation with honest efforts and intellectuals – they aren’t all of the same stipend, since, as all workers, they could be considered a contribuition to our society in general as a rich culture, as the others and, therefore, we shall never forget nothing and, specially, never try to foreshadow our history as a dynamical practice. So, at least, his very disrespectful remarks to all universities are, at best, very disgraceful, due to the fact that the contemporary world would need to conciliate his views, not within a rational system closed upon itself, but rather with critical thought.

Daniel Marques

Prop. 32. All reversion is accomplished through a likeness of the reverting terms to the goal of reversion

«For that which reverts endeavours to be conjoined in every part with every part of its cause, and desires to have communion in it and be bound to it. But all things are bound together by likeness as by unlikeness they are distinguished and severed. If, then, reversion is a communion and conjunction, and all communion and conjunction is through likeness, it follows that all reversion must be accomplished through likeness.» - in The Elements of Theology, Proclus.

X. 10. 14. Mas, porque se trata da natureza da mente (mens), afastemos da nossa reflexão todos os conhecimentos (notitias) que se colhem exteriormente por meio dos sentidos do corpo e prestemos atenção mais diligente ao que afirmámos: todas as mentes têm conhecimento de si mesmas e estão certas disso (et ea quae posuimus omnes mentes de se ipsis certasque esse diligentius attendamus). [...] Haverá, porém, alguém que duvide de que vive, e recorda, e compreende que duvida; se duvida, quer ter a certeza; se duvida, pensa; se duvida, sabe que não sabe; se duvida, ajuíza que lhe não convém dar irrefletidamente o seu consentimento. Quem, pois, duvida seja do que for, não deve duvidar de todas estas coisas, porque, se elas não existissem, não poderia duvidar de nenhuma delas (quisquis igitur alicunde dubitat de his omnibus dubitare non debet quae si non essent, de ulla re dubitare non posset).

De Trinitate, X, Santo Agostinho (trad. Arnaldo do Espírito Santo, Domingos Lucas Dias, João Beato, Maria Cristina de Castro-Maia de Sousa Pimentel).

Para a formação de um talento, que já por si mesmo tem uma propensão para se manifestar, a disciplina dará um contributo negativo [no sentido de correção], mas a cultura e a doutrina contribuirão positivamente.

Kant, in Crítica da Razão Pura (A709/B737 - A710/B738).

Se, porém, um homem pudesse libertar-se de todo o interesse e, indiferente a todas as consequências, considerasse as afirmações da razão apenas segundo o conteúdo dos seus fundamentos, tal homem, se não conhecesse outro meio de sair deste embaraço senão o de tomar partido por uma ou outra das doutrinas em conflito, encontrar-se-ia num estado de oscilação perpétua. Hoje, estaria convencido de que a vontade humana é livre; amanhã, se considerasse a cadeia indissolúvel da natureza, persuadir-se-ia [de] que a liberdade é apenas uma auto-ilusão e que tudo é simplesmente natureza. Porém, quando se tratasse do fazer e do agir, este jogo meramente especulativo da razão desapareceria [...] e escolheria os seus princípios unicamente de acordo com o interesse prático. Todavia, como a um ser que reflete e investiga, convém dedicar um certo tempo unicamente ao exame da sua própria razão, pondo de lado, ao fazê-lo, toda a parcialidade e comunicando abertamente aos outros as suas observações, para que delas ajuízem, não se pode censurar e ainda menos não se pode impedir ninguém de apresentar as teses e as antíteses, tal como podem ser defendidas, sem temer ameaças, perante jurados de igual condição (ou seja, perante fracos seres humanos).

Kant, Crítica da Razão Pura: A475/B503 - A476/B504, 8.ª ed. Calouste Gulbenkian.

(...) a dogmática transcendental [obriga o senso comum] a elevar-se a conceitos que ultrapassam largamente a penetração e a potência racional das inteligências mais exercitadas no pensar. (...) Encontra[-se] assim num estado em que nem os mais sábios lhe levam qualquer vantagem. Se é certo que disso pouco ou nada entende, também ninguém se pode gabar de entender muito mais; e embora não possa dissertar sobre esse assunto, tão metodicamente como outros, pode, todavia, entregar-se a todas as argúcias e subtilezas, porque divaga por entre puras ideias, acerca das quais se pode ser o mais eloquente possível, porque delas nada se sabe; ao passo que, no tocante à investigação da natureza, teria de calar-se e confessar a ignorância. Comodidade e vaidade são, pois, uma forte recomendação a favor destes princípios. (...) A dificuldade de não compreender [a suposição em que deposita confiança] não o inquieta, porque (não sabendo o que é compreender) nem sequer lhe vem ao espírito e assim reputa conhecido o que, por um uso frequente, se lhe tornou familiar. (...) Também o interesse especulativo desaparece perante o interesse prático e imagina saber aquilo que os seus temores ou as suas esperanças o levam a admitir ou a crer.

Kant, Crítica da Razão Pura (A472/B500 - A474/B502) - 8.ª ed. Calouste Gulbenkian.

É talvez difícil fazer afirmações veementes sobre estes assuntos sem os ter examinado muitas vezes. Mas não é certamente inútil ter analisado as dificuldades a respeito de cada um deles.

Aristóteles, in Categorias (8b-22-44).

Est. 78, VII [...] Mas, ó cego, Eu, que cometo, insano e temerário, Sem vós, Ninfas do Tejo e do Mondego, Por caminho tão árduo, logo e vário! Est. 35, VIII Dino feito de ser, no mundo, eterno, Grande no tempo antigo e no moderno! *** III - Horas mortas Se eu não morresse, nunca! E eternamente Buscasse e conseguisse a perfeição das cousas!

Camões, in Os Lusíadas & Cesário Verde, in “Sentimento de um Ocidental”.

Vinha por outra parte a linda esposa De Neptuno, de Celo e Vesta filha [Tétis], Grave e leda no gesto, e tão fermosa Que se amansava o mar, de maravilha. Vestida uma camisa preciosa Trazia, de delgada beatilha, Que o corpo cristalino deixa ver-se Que tanto bem não é para esconder-se

Canto VI, est. 21, in Os Lusíadas, Luís Vaz de Camões.

The unexamined life is not worth living.

Socrates (via fyp-philosophy)

Com esta condição, pesada e dura, Nacemos: o pesar terá firmeza, Mas o bem logo muda a natureza

Camões, in Os Lusíadas, Canto V, est. 80.

Ouvem-se, na sala que já nem existe, compassos de danças e risinhos de sedas.

Aquelas ruínas são o túmulo sagrado de um beijo adormecido - cartas lacradas com ligas azuis de fechos de oiro e armas reais e lises.

Almada Negreiros, "Ruídas" in Frisos.

E, por mais namorar o soberano Padre, de quem foi sempre amada e cara  Se lhe apresentava assi como ao Troiano (Páris) Na Selva Ideia, já se apresentara. Se a vira o caçador que o vulto humano Perdeu, vendo Diana na água clara, Nunca os famintos galgos o mataram, Que primeiro desejos o acabaram. Os crespos fios de ouro se esparziam Pelo colo que a neve escurecia; Andando, as lácteas tetas lhe tremiam, Com quem Amor (Eros) brincava e não se via; Da alva petrina flamas lhe saíam, Onde o Menino (Eros) as almas acendia. Pelas lisas colunas lhe trepavam Desejos, que como hera se enrolavam.

Luís Vaz de Camões, Os Lusíadas, II, 36 & 37.

Entendemos agora que Quando cruelmente triunfamos é fugaz o furor voraz dos músculos E por isso terror e alegria, então e hoje, nos trespassam

“Segunda Glosa”, Gastão Cruz, in Escarpas (Assírio e Alvim).