Philosopher Orhan Seyfi Ari?s philosophy on philosphers and philosophies on religion and faith, on the transcendental, and the educational, social, attitudes.
Orhan Seyfi Ari (1918 ? 1992) saw himself a humble teacher: ?I am neither a philosopher, nor a scholar? he wrote on his death they wrote about him, e,g,Dogrusoz -Kibris, 5 Feb. 99 ?Sometimes a great school is a man, sometimes a man is himself a great school? his philosophy on those issues appears to be briefly, as below...
Educational philosophies used, choice of philosophers? philosophies, teachers? teachings, weren?t teaching the difference from wild animals.
? ?I was an ape? you say -or amphibian
And now?! Are you not now ?man?!? ?
Failings were of philosophers, eastern and western thinkers, educational philosophy, teachers, teaching ?philosophies of education..
Were affecting philosophy of education, educational philosophies and educational philosophers, educational thinkers, educators and education, teachers and teaching, philosophy and science, knowledge and wisdom ?all, biases thriving on ignorance, seeking to unpopularise each other to masses with many concerns or under pain of ridicule or other injury unable not to believe or accept as told, by e.g. supporting ?the monkey trial? or ?discovering? the Piltdown man, by abusing trust and innocence of man in bigotry, in teaching, educational philosophy, educational philosophers, thinkers, educators, teachers too readily adopted viewpoint applications of not educators into philosophies of education, teaching ?in education, teaching young minds, philosophy of education was failing.
Ethical scepticism in philosophy by some philosophers and thinkers was a concern of daily life in philosophy of education to educational thinkers, educators, teachers in teaching -through philosophies of education, thinkers, educators, teachers, teaching, it affected society?s learned behaviour whether ontology, philosophy, philosophers, thinkers, could explain or not the transcendental, whether man lacked mental capacity for the transcendental as in some thinkers? and philosophers? philosophies or not, some educational philosophies? and educators? suggestion that ?truth? could be only scientifically known psychology?s increased acceptance of philosophy?s and philosophers? ?mind?, cosmology?s accord with eastern & western philosophy & great philosophers on a ?mysterious force?, made doubtful; science?s, ontology?s, educational philosophy?s, great thinkers?, great philosophers? not fully understanding the transcendental didn?t justify teachers?, educators?, deeming it untrue in philosophies of education, epistemology, education, teaching ?some educational philosophies, educational philosophy used s was wrong.
Good considered some eastern and western philosophies, thinkers, philosophers, man, bad other philosophies, thinkers, philosophers; in philosophies of education while differed thinkers?, philosophers? knowledge, wisdom, philosophy, logic in philosophy on man?s behaviour (irrespective of educators, teachers, teaching varying history) suggested that man was neither good nor bad but impressionable society?s imperfections contributed (also ethics of some philosophers and philosophy, thinkers, biased educational philosophies, teaching of & by educators, teachers) to man?s suffering alone ?in philosophy, education, philosophies of education, this arose from influences ignorant of man?s morality not being only about society?s retribution and assuming man irrational and neglecting his being regulated also by intrinsic desires and confusing strength with power and ignoring most educational philosophy and philosophers supported by history that man, his rationality always overcoming hysteria (when he represented wicked abuse & ignorance) and powerful, when considered nature or extent of retribution or neglect of intrinsic values intolerable, always (alas not only through educators, morals teachers, education, teaching) changed what he disliked.
"Continues the suffering, and continues the wait
But so long as tomorrows there are, the hope is great?
In educational philosophies adopted as policy, some philosophy, philosophers, thinkers on ethics, morals, educators, teachers, often forgot that, ?bad? everywhere in minority, while man?s passion made it impossible always to ?turn the other cheek? and e.g. his various laws extended mitigating circumstances to crimes of passion though cruel when by his biological constitution unchangeable by education he was in fright without flight, his natural morality included fairness and desire not to fail himself or loved ones by misconduct ?adopted educational philosophies ignored that but for abuse, ignorance, he preferred being thought well of to being thought ill of.
?Truth? of philosophy and philosophers, in practice ?whether personal or (and especially) impersonal, whether experienced or presupposed, two kinds of existed: truth global, truth environmental; both were good, essential in teaching, education. Truth global was truth known as perceived -or through science, and truth accepted inductively or deductively by logic of philosophers and philosophy ?man?s ?understanding? man everywhere, always, desiring to enjoy more, better, including satisfaction of his intellectual curiosities in metaphysics, aspired to this ?sometimes with biases of philosophers and philosophy or of thinkers, educators, teachers in education and teaching. Truth environmental was that which, for reasons affected by various factors ?e.g. resources, as distinct from or as variations of truth global, some of man?s aspirations and behaviour had to be based on for better and more enjoyment in his immediate environment of avoiding society?s retribution and of extrinsic and intrinsic rewards ?through philosophy and philosophers, thinkers, educators and teachers, this suffered in education, teaching (mostly of history and metaphysics) much bias. In philosophy philosophers and thinkers on values, in education educators, teachers, should balance these truths in educational philosophies, in teaching and education of educator and teachers, in teaching pupils.
Some philosophers, thinkers, trends on philosophy of education and teaching, history of teaching and education, showed bias in epistemology, science, philosophy, incorrect knowledge in teaching and education of educators and teachers, through educators, teachers in formal teaching, about nature and man when cultural philosophy of education and teaching ignored another?s cultural philosophy of education and teaching -and attitude, and was not balanced environmental truth with global truth, that did not change e.g. adultery also in the laws of Austria until 1997 and over 20 states of the USA being a crime nor the extent of unacceptability of pre-marital relationships no less than in Turkey being in Greece, but gave rise by abuse or ignorance to extreme speculations also through philosophers, philosophy, thinkers, educators, teachers, education, teaching, causing leanings globally undesirable, injurious to both society and the individual.
?Society is the soil, individuals the seeds to grow
Honest & sure's the deal: you reap what you sow?
Philosophy, science, argued on religion, great philosophers differed on God -education and teaching of and by educators, teachers, came to adopt the other extreme of educational philosophies with same innocence, ignorance, obstinacy; whether on spirituality with admitted unknowns adopters and adapters educational philosophies considered themselves more knowledgeable in teaching and education on much eastern and western philosophy by many eastern and western philosophers on afterlife than when in the womb about the world, was ?God? of religion not basically the ?mysterious force? of all philosophers and philosophy and science -reminding of same basic values of all philosophers and philosophy in keeping social order that were, as based e.g. on ?the ten commandments?, of all religious, secular, materialist societies?!
Despite some philosophers and philosophy, educators and teachers and education, wasn?t man?s imagination shameless, unknowns of philosophers and philosophy and science limiting reason -and (notwithstanding influences through religion, philosophers, philosophy, science, educators, teachers in education, teaching) faiths? basics philosophers?, philosophy?s ?morality?, psychology?s super-ego or perceptual value-order-meaning based ?conscience??!
Concern with language of philosophers, of philosophy, had to be more, extended beyond its symbolism which knowledge changed: Language, was being perverted with biases or ignorance ?it was disservice to future generations that e.g. ?gaiety? they would hardly understand the meaning of as used in great literature it was as wrong for artistes, intellectuals, academics, to consider forceful replacing of words from languages of nations they hailed to be advancement in civilisation as internationally to fund literacy programs to teach basic ?international language?; language competently used had been responsible for social reforms through e.g. Dickens or Ibsen, such enjoyment through e.g. Shakespeare or Fuzuli, such mystical and philosophical literature as e.g. Goethe?s ?the long term effect might be comparable to loss of great works of literature, philosophy, by mobs? burning of library of Alexandria; philosophers, educators adopting educational philosophies, teachers teaching, should explain, ensure appreciation of this.
In philosophy some philosophers, thinkers, in teaching and education educators and teachers, did innocent disservice where on lines of biases or ignorance of influences based philosophy and teaching truth of two and two making four dependent on who said it, even in terms of e.g. of Avecinna?s philosophy being right but Ibn Sina?s philosophy wrong much more than man?s experiences when young did that, at all times, enable cruelty by presenting to man his fellow men as bad, his being advocated by abusers of his innocence or by the ignorant to behave badly effecting similar response; there was much to an address to a teachers school that true victory and greatest service to mankind was against ignorance. It fell on philosophy and philosophers of education, on educators, teachers, to take heed of the need to balance practical teaching with academic teaching enabling doers to be or with them also there to be thinkers; man aspired to quiet enjoyment ?did not systems that failed man?s aspirations to cherish always perish?!
It would not help knowledge in philosophy, nor in teaching and education of and by educators and teachers, for philosophical thought to resign itself to silence on what none could deny but many could not explain; philosophy and philosophers, philosophical thought and philosophical logic, unaffected by ?metaphilosophy? existed because man?s curiosity compelled him what he could not know to seek to have an appreciation of, although one could not identically experience another?s e.g. joy or pain and disagreement on e.g. the extent of it was possible and argument in view of unequal knowledge possibly impossible in philosophy philosophers, in teaching and education educators, teachers aspiring to prevent forcing on or distorting young minds, were forgetting that religions advocated a mind usable well or badly, just as science the intellect and philosophy man?s will in systems and orders requiring faith in unknowns or faith in reasons secret and both similarly abusable, some assuming only e.g. Dewey or Darwin worth mention, St. La Salle or monk Mendell not ?that disregarded man?s reasons for requiring, e.g. in UK?s Education Act, when teaching a theory is taught related theories also to discuss to enable application of ?mind?, that appreciation.
Philosophy was not nonsense divorced from logic, nor affected ?metaphilosophy? application of philosophical logic, inductive or deductive, to the known about both the known and the unknown ?also in the latter respect capable of useful sense. Scientific research on philosophy, even with e.g. eventual agreement with millennia old philosophy and philosophers on man?s faculties in relation to teaching and education, was good but that scorn through educators and teachers in formal teaching and education for some philosophies and philosophers was considerably based on ignorance, e.g. of psychologists? increasing acceptance of ?mind?, of evolutionary theories not being as hypothesised, the uncertainty principle of physics, personal development theories being adaptations from philosophy & philosophers, was bad for teaching, education, educators, teachers, as trends in educational philosophy.
Man had potential, always learned -his appearance of being more capable of learning when young had to do with many concerns of adult life affecting as non-use did a car battery love aided in education and teaching but did leave much to be desired if rapport or response was without conscious understanding.
Educators and teachers teaching, philosophers in philosophy, did owe care in teaching and education not to couple biases affecting teaching and education contrary to man?s aspirations with such innocence ?in rightly applied philosophies of education that did begin by exercising thought in education, and teaching to think.
?Never the thinker expires
Who in others thinking inspires?
Short note about the author
EOA UK
The author has based the above on sources had access to for a photo biography of Orhan Seyfi Ari, a web site chosen as a best site by Internet Adviser magazine (Jul 01 UK) with recommending "Read.. the life of this extraordinary poet & thinker" -also copyright free on: http://www.geocities.com/eoa uk/index.htm.
Author: EOA UK