Quodlibet

https://antinomie.it/index.php/2020/09/23/jannis-kounellis-itaca-per-sempre/

Ithaque est ma mère, Ithaque est ma jeunesse, Ithaque esta mon viel age. Itaque est ma mort. Jannis Kounellis

Un vecchio barcone si staglia all'orizzonte marino. Sulla poppa distinguiamo la sagoma buia di un uomo immobile. I toni di bianco e nero e il forte contrasto della composizione rendono la direzione del suo sguardo indecifrabile: potrebbe volgerci le spalle, o ammiccare sornionamente allo spettatore. A una prima lettura, la foto ci restituisce una sensazione di solenne immobilità. Dopo un'analisi più attenta, ci accorgiamo della scia bianca che segue la mole dell'imbarcazione e taglia l'oscurità del mare: si tratta di un peschereccio in movimento. Dove è diretto? Lo scatto è di Mimmo Jodice che immortala Jannis Kounellis dal golfo di Napoli per il Manifesto della mostra alla Modern Art Agency del 1969. Come riporta Menna (1979), l'imbarcazione ha da poco lasciato il porto di Mergellina e l'artista "sta dando un ultimo sguardo a Castel dell'Ovo".

"John Philoponus produced an influential argument that time must have had a beginning. . . ., little attention has been paid to his view of the nature of time, which is contained in his exposition of Aristotle. Yet the argument seems to rest on his view of the nature of time."--George Couvalis


Definitions and Prologue
Time - is the continuum of experience in which events pass from future through the present to the past
Cosmic time - is the time covered by the physical formation and development of the universe
Sidereal time - is measured by the diurnal motion of stars

While the argument on whether or not the universe had a beginning, persisting into the 19th and 20th centuries, Stephen Hawking stated, "All the evidence seems to indicate, that the universe has not existed forever, but that it had a beginning." John Philoponus, doctrine of creatio ex nihilo, in the 6th century, stated that the universe began to exist "at a finite point in time." He defended his  thesis against Aristotle,  demonstrating the absurdity of an infinite temporal regress of events*.  His Study of time in 'De aeternitate mundi' against Proclus, in 529 on creation, time generation came in coexistence with the universe, has been supported centuries later with the empirical confirmation from the evidence for the 'big-bang' model of the universe.

If we agree that the universe began to exist, does this necessitate as well a beginning to time itself ? William L. Craig responds, "The answer is: it all depends. If a person believes that time exists apart from events such that if there were no events there would still be time, then our argument does not entail prima facie a beginning to time. On the other hand, if one accepts that time cannot exist apart from events, then a beginning of events would entail a beginning of time as well." Few modern authors hold to the independent state of time apart from events, they are the heirs of the Newtonian conception of absolute time. Although space would not exist without physical objects, time would.

But without physical objects, time could not be measured: one could not tell an hour from a day in a time without objects. Therefore, to say that the universe began to exist on such a time scale would simply mean that a finite time ago there were no physical objects. A relational view of time suggests that time began to exist, as the universe began to exist, as it seems superior to a Newtonian view because it is difficult to see how time could exist apart from events. The Newtonian objection that every instant of time implies a prior instant is adequately answered by the relational view. Thus, concludes Craig, the proper understanding of God, time, and eternity would be that God exists changelessly and timelessly prior to creation and in time after creation.

http://commonsenseatheism.com/?p=3533
___________________________________________________________________________________

"The very expression ‘the perception of time’ invites objection. Insofar as time is something different from events, we do not perceive time as such, but changes or events in time. But, arguably, we do not perceive events only, but also their temporal relations."-- Robin Le Poidevin, Stanford Encycl. of philosophy


Time is in the eye of the beholder
"Scientists have shown that animals' ability to perceive time is linked to their pace of life. The rate at which time is perceived varies across animals. For example, flies owe their skill at avoiding rolled up newspapers to their ability to observe motion on finer time scales than our own eyes can achieve, allowing them to avoid the newspaper in a similar fashion to the "bullet time" sequence in the popular film The Matrix. In contrast, one species of tiger beetle runs faster than its eyes can keep up, essentially becoming blind and requiring it to stop periodically to re-evaluate its prey's position. Even in humans, athletes in various sports have also been shown to quicken their eyes' ability to track moving balls during games."--Science News

In his new book, Objective Becoming, Dr Bradford Skow, professor of philosophy, Massachusetts Institute of Technology presented a new approach to the ontological nature of time.  After examining some of the theories that have been postulated to elucidate time, he embraces the view that all points in time are equally real. This theory known as the ‘block universe’ states that the past, present and future already exist. He also asserts that our passage through space-time is not like a spotlight, and that the experiences you had yesterday, last month, or even a decade ago are all real. But he stresses time that travel between the different eras is not possible, as we are now in a different part of space-time.

John Philoponus time co-existence with the universe, has shown up fourteen centuries later, in Albert Einstein' general theory of relativity, with time as an integral component of space-time, curved due to nearby planetary mass attraction. The significance of the observer in the perception of time has been mentioned, possibly for the first time, in 529 by John Philoponus, in his refutation, "Against Proclus on the Eternity of the World." The Alexandrian philosopher and polymath, considers time perception by humans to be a function of the motion of celestial bodies, anticipating Einstein's special theory of relativity, where human perception of time is related to the frames of reference.   

John Philoponus defines time as the measure of movement of heavenly bodies. Hence, motion is not synonymous with observed time, but rather 'a characteristic', subject to its measurement. This viewpoint of Philoponus describes precisely the way by which humans may perceive the flow of time.  Similarly humans perceives days, nights and the seasons' cycles. The recognition of these phenomena, which gives rise to our perception of time, is based on the rotational motion of the Earth around its axis and its revolution around the Sun. Philoponus conclusion about time, pertains with keeping in mind the co-existence of time and the Universe, with the possibility of time definition by the motions of celestial bodies.

Time Perception by humans
"when the soul is removed, time is removed together with it."-- Philoponus, On Aristotle Physica.
John Philoponus attempted to answer the question of whether the absence of an observer to record the motion, while commenting on Aristotle’s 'Physica'. The Aristotelian system for time consists of three factors: The 'counted' (motion), the soul (the observer who measures the motion), and the result of the measurement of motion (time). Thus, if the observer is absent, there will be no measurement and consequently no time, since it is the result of the measurement, which means also absence of time (Aristotle, Physica). Philoponus, following the Aristotelian definition of time, suggests the same result.

The use of the term psyche (soul) in this case means the intellect, since it is closely related to the  conception of time, which is a result of the observation and measurement of motion. Hence, Philoponus separates the physical event of motion from the mental activity of its measurement, similar to Aristotle in Physica. So, Could one speak about time without the existence of an observers? Before the appearance of human on Earth (or other creatures in the Universe), no observer was available in order to record the motions of celestial bodies, therefore time should not have existed, as a mental result. Meanwhile, there is continuous celectial motion, which is evidenced in both the structural elements of the Universe’s matter and the binary star systems ( two stars orbiting a common center of mass).

Meanwhile, there is continuous celestial motion, which is evidenced in both the structural elements of the Universe’s matter and the binary star systems. As a logical imperative, therefore, before the appearance of human Earth was also moving around the Sun and around its own axis, with only difference that these motions had not been recorded by observers. Thus, it is obvious that without some mental action there is only motion without time being mentioned. Philoponus realizes that the perception of time by the soul presupposes the additional determination of a point of reference, which he calls the nyn (now), an entity he assumes has no duration, but is merely a mental section of a time span corresponding to the present. This is the reason for which the ‘now’ is a part of the motion that is “instantaneous”-- Philoponus, In Categoriae

This stub essay is posted to the memory of Wolfgang Achtner, his paper is the core and mind of this essay.

https://www.academia.edu/28471099/Philoponus_on_the_Nature_of_Time
https://www.academia.edu/5502657/The_Perception_of_Time_by_Humans_according_to_John_Philoponus_and_its_relation_with_the_Theory_of_Special_and_General_Re

The article addresses Merleau-Ponty's later philosophy of nature in relation to two of its central operating concepts, behaviour and latency. It then examines some contemporary arguments for an extended evolutionary synthesis from the perspective of this philosophy of nature. I argue that Merleau-Ponty's philosophy of nature may provide a productive ontological grounding to the extended evolutionary synthesis.

Existen demasiados discursos, actividades y especialistas que afirman que hacen investigación artística. Como se aprecia en la abundante bibliografía sobre el tema, no existe una única definición estable de la actividad. Por ello hemos optado por distinguir distintas escenas de trabajo que se autodenominan «investigación artística» y que se distinguen por sus metas, objetivos, modos de trabajo, producción y discursos. Dentro de muchas otras posibles, se estudian cuatro escenas fundamentales: investigación artística profesional, artistas que investigan, artistas universitarios e investigación artística formativa. La primera parte de este trabajo presenta las principales características de cada escena. Posteriormente, describiremos nuestro modelo de trabajo para la investigación artística formativa. Por último, expondremos dos casos que lo ejemplifican. Con ello queremos contribuir a concebir los trabajos finales, tesis o tesinas de los diferentes ciclos de formación musical superior,...

For Hume virtues are character traits that are useful and agreeable to ourselves and to others. Such traits are wide-ranging, from moral virtues such as benevolence to intellectual virtues such as courage of mind and penetration. This paper focuses on Hume’s account of the latter. I argue that Hume is a virtue epistemologist, principally interested in the role that intellectual character traits play in social interactions rather than in the justifiedness of particular beliefs. I shall argue that this interpretation is consonant with his mitigated skepticism, and that it calls for a reappraisal of the marshalling of Hume and Reid into the contemporary debate between reductionists and non-reductionists with respect to the epistemology of testimony.

The doctrine of the imago dei is foundational for Christian anthropology. It informs the nature of humanity as individuals and as a corporate entity. It is the basis of the Christian valuation of human life. And it defines the purpose of humans both now and in the world to come. ...

... | Ayuda. El trío con piano de Ravel. Autores: Roy Howat; Localización: Quodlibet: Revista de especialización musical, ISSN 1134-8615, Nº 45, 2009 , pags. 42-51. © 2001-2011 Universidad de La Rioja · Todos los derechos reservados. XHTML 1.0; UTF‑8.

RESUMO
A partir de quatro propostas teóricas sobre as possibilidades do conhecimento e da ciência expressas por Foucault, Deleuze, Lévi-Strauss e Agamben – o erro, o falso o mito e o quodlibet – o texto busca refletir sobre a experiência como forma pedagógica que circunscreve a formação e a criatividade no campo do audiovisual. Como fundamento desse processo, evoca alguns conceitos de Montaigne para entender dois projetos de formação para o audiovisual, vividos por alunos do curso de cinema da PUC-Rio e moradores de comunidades faveladas do Rio de Janeiro em cursos de extensão ministrados na Universidade.

ABSTRACT
From four theoretical proposals about the possibilities of knowledge and science expressed by Foucault, Deleuze, Agamben and Lévi-Strauss – the error, the false, myth and quodlibet – the text seeks to reflect on the experience as educational manner that limits the formation and creativity in the audiovisual field. As a fundament of this process, evokes some concepts from Montaigne to understand two projects for audiovisual formation, experienced by students of cinema of PUC-Rio and residents of favela communities in Rio de Janeiro in extension courses taught in the University.

"12. If any one confess not that the Word of God suffered in the Flesh and hath been crucified in the Flesh and tasted death in the Flesh and hath been made First-born of the Dead, inasmuch as He is both Life and Life-giving as God, be he anathema."-- Cyril, the pillar of faith, to Nestorius; 12th  Anthema
______________________________________________

Christological Prologue
"In the formula 'mia physis tou theou logou sesarkomene',  physis can only mean a particular nature of the second devine person and thus the Logos hypostasis." -- Theresia Hainthaler

"When Basil and Gregory of Nyssa spoke of the Trinity as ‘one ousía, three hypostáseis,’ they were not, Philoponus continues, enunciating for primary substances, but used ‘substance’ (ousía) in the secondary, abstract sense of essence or universal nature."-- C. Wildberg, John Philoponus; Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
_____________________________________________________________________________

Leslie MacCoull, the celebrated Coptologist who led the discovery and recognition, declaring a bilingual Egyptian provincial elite, actively sharing 'Miaphysite' Christology of their country's faithful.  Dioscorus, the learned lawyer and lyric poet, reveals John Philoponus, Alexandrine teaching on both the Trinitarian and Theopaschite faith. ‘One of the Trinity suffered in the flesh', shouted the Scythian monks, led by John Maxentius, which arose in Constantinople in 519, expressing their opposition to what they saw as a Nestorian exposition of the Chalcedonian definition.

Theopaschite formula
"The doctrine of the suffering of God is so fundamental to the very soul of modern Christianity that it has emerged with very few theological shots ever needing to be fired. Indeed, this doctrinal revolution occurred without a widespread awareness that it was happening. A list of modern Theopaschite thinkers would include Barth, Berdyaev, Bonhoeffer, Brunner, Cobb, and liberation theologians generally, Küng, Moltmann, R. Niebuhr,  Pannenberg, Ruether and feminist theologians, Temple, and Teilhard.

Contemporary scholars admit now that behind Arius’s campaign to differentiate Jesus from God was the Hellenistic doctrinal conviction that the Almighty God cannot suffer. "Rowan Williams argues that Arius had the right idea about divine suffering, but the wrong idea of God, which “puts the unavoidable question of what the respective schemes in the long term make possible for theology.” One must honestly admit, according to Williams, the “odd conclusion that the Nicene fathers achieved not only more than they knew but a good deal more than they wanted.”--Jeff Meyers, Yes, I’m a Theopaschite

The bitter arguments over Christology had focused on the arguments and the debates about Christ's combined nature or His two natures. But on Calvary it was not a nature who suffered, but a person. And the Theopaschite formula draws us back to reflect on Who that person is - the Logos, God the Son and Word of God, known to us in His humanity as Jesus of Nazareth. It is the Word of God Who suffers, impassible in His deity, he has put on our humanity, and lives, suffers and dies with us as one of us to raise us with Him."

By using the Theopaschite formula, in the face of the hostility of the akoimetoi (unsleeping monks), who recited the divine office continuously in their monasteries by relays of choirs), Emperor Justinian was convinced the formula was orthodox. Through the good offices of Bishop Hypatios of Ephesus, who visited rome in 533, Justinian won the support of Pope John II in his letter Olim Quidem to the Constantinopolitan Senate. The Theopaschite formula can be read in a schismatical sense to assert that one of the Trinity suffered as God!

Meanwhile, in a perfectly Orthodox sense, asserting that Jesus who suffered is the same person as the Logos, the second hypostasis of the trinity. The doctrine of communicatio idiomatum provides the theological basis for the formula's orthodox sense, attributing all acts of Jesus Christ to one and the same divine person. The term ‘Theopaschite’ has a confusing use: it designates the orthodox doctrine that the divine Logos is the person who suffered as man on the cross of Calvary, but also designates a radical position of Eutychian monophysites.

The Gramaticus' Miaphysitism
"The startng point for Philoponus is that a union of natures (out of two, 'one composite One') takes place; that is seen already in the proem of the Diaetetes. The union in Christ is in reality; it is not a cohaesio. Two particular natures - even the humanity of Christ, although with its existence it is immediately united to the Logos, is to be confessed a nature and hypostasis! - are united in one composite nature, which corresponds to a hypostasis. - The union in Christ is conceived as one that is called forth by the natures. . ." --T. Hainthaler, John Philoponus

Tritheism and Trinitarian God
While the Bible reveals that there is only one God, the Scripture as plainly affirms the distinction of the three persons in the Godhead. In Isaiah 6:8 God says, “Whom shall I send, and who will go for us?” Here, on the one hand God speaks of Himself as “I, ” and on the other hand as “Us.” Then, is God singular or plural? This is a mystery, since God also speaks of Himself as “Us," Gen 1:26. In His divine words, the one unique God frequently speaks of Himself as “Us.” This is believed due to the three Persons of the Godhead – the Father, the Son, and the Spirit.

Although God is uniquely one, there is still the  issue of the three Persons. The threefold distinction in God, expressed by the description ‘Trinity, ‘ as an attempt of Christians to conceive and express the mystery of the Infinite God in Jesus Christ own terms. Theologians believe that the use of the phrase, ‘The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, One God‘ is the simplest address of the mystery that the Miaphysite Church of Alexandria has clung to. The case of John Philoponus and Tritheism is well treated by T. Hainthaler, a Catholic Christologist in a concse but clear review (Christ in Christian Tradition, Vol 2, Part 4, pp. 131-138)

Proceeding from the doctrine of the Trinity, John Philoponus is inspired to propose the final thesis, that the union in the Godhead is expressed only in abstraction. T. Hainthaler wrote, "Divinity and substance, which are in the venerable Trinity, are not one in reality but only in the mind, and in the reason. And so we understand God as one. But there are three substances of God and of nature, since they are separated into hypostases. And thus one is God the Father, one God the Son, and one God the Holy Spirit."   

Accordingly, he confesses three consubstantial divine persons, suggesting that the homoousios is lacking in the idiomata (properties), namely, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, nor in the koinon. After six decades praying the Coptic liturgy of St. Basil, I got it, saying: < One is the Holy Father, One is the Holy Son, One is the Holy Spirit. > "Philoponus put his contemporaries on notice that this settlement "as about to unravel: for what should the one nature of the divinity be if not the common intelligible content of the divine nature seen on its own and separated in the conception (Te epinoia) of the property of each hypostasis?

"For this outspoken and provocative position' Philoponus has been widely condemned as a tritheist' but as Dirk Krausmuller has shown' his thinking "as far less idiosyncratic than heresiological accounts would suggest. Whatever one's assessment of Philoponus' own contribution to the history of Christian thought - and any such assessment is marred by the fragmentary transmission of his works - his rigorous commitment to intellectual coherence serves to highlight the knock, on-effect Severus' emphasis on the ontological divinity of the individual had on the ontological status universal physis."--Johannes Zachhuber

Philoponus' Conclusion
Since hypóstasis is certainly not an accident of divinity, it must be the case that the three hypostáseis of the Trinity are three particular divine substances with distinct properties. Only on this assumption, too, is it reasonable to speak of the consubstantiality of the three Persons, for if there were only one divine substance, confirmed by fragments of the very late treatise On the Trinity.  In accordance with Aristotle, Philoponus claims that universals exist only in the mind. Thus, the claim that there is only one God appears to be true of the unity constituted by the concept of divinity.

http://grbs.library.duke.edu/article/viewFile/1971/6177
https://www.academia.edu/14493771/Discerning_the_Boundary_between_Trinitarianism_and_Tritheism
https://www.academia.edu/1971933/Support_Me_in_the_Whelming_Flood_Karl_Barth_and_His_Interpreters_on_Christ_Chalcedon_and_the_Suffering_of_the_Impassible_God
https://www.academia.edu/3816426/Basil_and_the_Three-Hypostases-Tradition_Reconsidering_the_origins_of_Cappadocian_Theology