To Judith butler elsaied abdelghani

Elsaied Abdelghani
2022 / 7 / 11

"We see that the definition of man should not deal with his metaphysical essence´-or-capabilities in him that are confirmed by empirical observations - the greatest characteristic of man is his work´-or-his -function-, the correct term for him is the one that derives from this concept. The -function- includes various activities, including language, myth, religion, art and science, then: every philosophy For the human being must search in the composition of these various branches".
There has always been a crisis in the definitions of those who believe in one semantic face, and those who doubt it are accused of camouflaging without looking at their logic, which is also as special as the logic of others, but the matter is in the authoritarian imposition determined by force.
Domination is achieved even by ignoring that any view is a one-dimensional view of an imperfect human being. The process of appropriation and philosophical division revealed just that to me.
The research is only done in a specific form linked to visions.
If we have a definition, we will refer to dictionaries that contain references to the meaning of final forms, like the self whose definition does not stop by defining itself´-or-illusion by defining. A static utopian perfection is a form of psychological fear.
That is why I have always said that philosophy does not exist apart from language. Language is a dimension in everything and an inherent dimension in the philosophy of definition, whether concepts´-or-others.
And individualism is what produces the major views from which little is taken to generalize and exist as an argumentative colloquial philosophical space. Whether
The definition of identity is always different´-or-productive. Expansion ends with the demise of the person. The individual is the offspring of the plural and unity, his "thinking isolation," and the plural is the offspring of units and authorities.
The concept of authority here, which can produce everything, is rejected by the majority because it robs them of their intrinsic value and superficial ego.
why the power?
Society always sanctifies the authorities, no matter how much they suffer from them, use them, flog them, because they protect them in the face of the nihilism of life, the absence of meaning. I say meaning because it is the dominant word, while there is a difference between meaning and understanding and awareness “because understanding´-or-awareness is a psychological act based on intellectual representations, while meaning is formed by a purely mental act.”
And that cognitive, philosophical and psychological tolerance is not only a human form, but is a logical and cognitive form as well.
The meaning is formed in the consciousness of the human being first from his continuous intellectual and social interactions in time, and it is brought into the mind by means of intellectual processes raised by the mind without external influence´-or-through external influences such as language. "
That is, meaning is a product of many, a psychological product, a social product, a literary product...etc.
Authority draws his life and organizes it even if he flees from it after that´-or-revolts against it, and authority does not mean the law, but rather the force that does not argue because it has redress without deterrence. We find this in the least relations that exist in society with any authority from the father to the mother to the son of the state to the head of work for religion. Everything can be transformed into an authority, regardless of the degree of its alleged angelicism historically´-or-in the prevailing.
Views differ in seeing things as powers, but has the world not been created by the possibilities of its existence with power? Did the free person not benefit from the authority that made him´-or-participated in making him free in his sense?
Does not the self exist and persist in power? Because it protects him from fragility?
But this self-power is less in manifest synthesis than an external self?
That is, they are unconsciously stacked,´-or-lined, the evidence of a human being s resurrection is illusory! Unlike the self, which is completely subject to external authority?
Man is subject to a religion, to a political authority, to an intellectual belief, to another person, because he needs to be and cannot by himself.
Because the utopian concept of freedom has not been found in anyone, and it is always considered and standardized, I am not against that, but with the knowledge that this is a concept that is separate from the possibility of the immediate and dimensional condition of man.
And that biological openness´-or-biological evolution opens up many horizons for formation, meaning that it is the material that produces cognitive possibilities in a large way.
The authority does not depend on the known form of the executioner and the prey. The authority starts from here in the majority of the case, but it begins much before that and begins much before that because the biospatial, psychological, environmental features, etc., determine the possibilities in which he will walk.
Hence the matter was for me in the concept of paradox does not exist´-or-the greatness of anything´-or-anyone, because the value absolute is not free from me and the authority that created him.
The many visions I find, I find, revolve around that, about meaninglessness and creating walls before it.
The forms that you find strange and authoritarian are present in them in one way´-or-another, that what destroys power, even for the moment, is madness.
Life itself can be considered power, mind power, and much, much more.
Power is the dominant force, as Foucault defined it, “Power is the probability that an actor in a social relationship is in a position to carry out his will despite resistance.”
Power is analyzed into three main branches:
1. The legitimate powers exercised by the people in the formal society
Positions such as rulers, bureaucrats, police, judges, enterprise officers, business owners, supervisors, -union- leaders
2. Structural paradigms of unequal forces held by culturally constructed social groups in opposing divisions, such as classes´-or-races and genders
3. Relational models that consider power as a strategy in social relations
The apparent form of any authority is always clear of hegemony, but it is based in its roots only on invisible forms in the appearance of people. That is, the authoritative expansion is only in the static/static space..etc.
That is why power is used, all knowledge, religions, etiquette, and this power at the end of things are people who understand the psychological and economic needs...etc.
And power is always dynamic, sometimes accelerated by political and social events, but the personalized presence and absence of the greatest authoritarian do not make it easily perceived.
That is, the human being was supposed to have a representative "human" above everything, but the interactions between the authorities and the top of the pyramid always do not exist by appointment as a person because of the rapid and different movement of the many rules of the pyramid.
This conspiracy and the comprehensive knowledge of any authority is an epistemological illusion.
Power dynamics between individuals and groups may not always correspond to legitimate expectations through social structures and cultural norms, and culturally arranged by social´-or-subjective identities. Non-structural resources for exercising power, such as individual personality, social skills,´-or-social groups that organize powers with each other can provide "powers over" not only to resist rules but also to change social hierarchies and culturally constructed power structures.




Add comment
Rate the article

Bad 12345678910 Very good
                                                                                    
Result : 100% Participated in the vote : 1