https://imgp.golos.io/0x0/http://storage6.static.itmages.ru/i/17/0927/h_1506536239_6116685_546ee268de.jpg


 Perhaps - this is the most difficult task for a person of all possible.  The reason is quite simple: if knowledge expands the horizons of human understanding, then philosophical knowledge creates a new reality in the head of a person, which inevitably occurs with an internal change. 

 This is a real creative process, completely taking out the brain.  I would say so: the most fun adventure in life.  If you rolled off the mountain on a snowboard, you still follow the route, handled by the snowcapped, it ends up in a descent, for someone on a stretcher, but still you will be down.

  Having taken up philosophy, you will lose not only the beaten track, but you will always come to a country where you have never been.  It is necessary to define all the concepts used in the text. Any philosophical text is a not understood set of words of everyday human language and many people try to apply them to the written text. 

 The philosopher uses the same words as his epoch, with the same linguistic constructions, there is simply no other language.  However, all the terminology is a compressed symbol, different not only in various historical epochs, but also in different philosophical systems of the same time. 

 For example, the concept of "time" can have dozens of meanings in order to catch it, it is necessary to disassemble it entirely, which the author understands in his case.  And so with all other concepts.  First of all, we write down all the terms used in the text and understand the underlying meanings.

  And here is the first underwater rock.  Very often people try to memorize dullly, without bothering with the investigation of meanings.  Philosophy is not the addition of truth to one another, it is every time a new world and all words learned before have no meaning.  

That is why the main thing is understanding the terms.  I'm a supporter of the old school, so every term I turn into a graphic image or picture.  For example, Proclus Diadoch writes about emanation, in my head there is an image of a sweaty idea in the form of a TV from the movie "Call". 

 Marxist philosophers about Democritus were very interesting.  His utterance reached: "[Only] there is a color in the general opinion, in the opinion of - sweet, in opinion - bitter, in reality [there are only] atoms and emptiness".  

These wild little fools read from the bell tower: the whole philosophy of Ancient Greece was about ideas and emanations, which has to do with the general.  And Democritus is opposed to opinion, it means against ideas, and if so, we will define it in materialists.  Moreover, he writes about atoms, rushing in the void.  Here this nonsense you can read in any textbook of philosophy and in Wikipedia. 

 All that had to be had in front of you - a clear graphic image: emptiness, there are atoms in it that have endless eidos (ideas) of various forms.  The cosmos contains spheres having different ideas - these are nothing but pathos in the human head, having different applications.

  Draw huge balls, one "Moscow is the third Rome", the other is the great mission of the Russian people or simply imperial ambitions.  And now let's look at how pathos works.  Information comes from outside, if it corresponds to pathos, for example, the story from the "Eternal Call" about Alain Dulles' plan to destroy Russia, invented by the author from beginning to end, will go well as a knife in oil in this performance. 

 But the idea of ​​humanism completely contradicts it and can not be recognized and, moreover, perceived.  The movement of atoms (pathos) in the void collision and their mutual repulsion, is nothing more than the process of the transition of mental activity from one pathos to another.

  The clash of pathos pushes thought from one idea to another, without destroying them.  So they rush in the void, tormenting human minds.  And here is some kind of materialism?  The subject of Democritus' interest is the inner space of a person, which he saw in such an interesting way, and quite rightly, that confirmed further reflections of other philosophers.

  # Disclosure of methodology

The next step is to read the text to identify the methodology on which it is built - the most downhill process.Once our teacher of pre-retirement age came not in a dull soviet dress, but in a luxurious, full of charm, charm and mystery.  Instead of dullly brought eyes, something colorless - a kilogram of bright plaster.  Exaltation bursting happy woman. 

 Naturally, we, beginning philosophers, round idiots, tactlessly asked: "What happened?" "In less than thirty years, I, having read Aristotle's Organon 52 times, was able to understand what it was written about!" (For reference: There  the binary code that underlies modern programming is written.)

 My record - 34 times I had to re-read "Lectures about Proust", in which psychological topology is painted.  Capital, for example, came only from 4 times, and even then by youth.  Books that do not go beyond the boundaries of my understanding, I do not read at all, everything that is clear does not interest me at all.  At this stage, the previously drawn graphic images are built into a specific architecture.

  Words turn into groups of points of space, ideas begin to manifest themselves as heavy objects possessing gravitational force, swelling the space of understanding, leading us to the topology of spaces.  

Two people Marcel Proust and the Marquis de Saint-Loup look at one girl named Rachelle.  Sen Lu, being in the theater, was overwhelmed by the perception of the feeling of beauty, it burst out and flung Rachelle from head to foot, in it all his lofty feelings were imprinted. 

 She became a goddess for him, spread out across all points of the space of his inner life.  And Marcel saw Rachelle in a brothel, she is for him an ordinary 20-franc whore.  Two glances, two topological spaces rested against Rachelle, they reach out to each other, always crawling to meet each other on a multitude of points, but they do not have points of intersection.  

The set of points of the interior space of Saint Lu never intersects the set of points of the Marcel space.  The two languages ​​of lovers are not able to touch each other, always looking for each other, but never finding.  In short, the solid god Eros. 

 Photos from Google.

Earlier this post was published in Russian: https://golos.io/psk/@varja/kak-rabotat-s-filosofskimi-tekstami