Lecture 4. Philosophy. Being: Plato. Objective idealism.

Schools and philosophers of Ancient Greece period about Being: Plato. Western and Oriental “Being Patterns”: Nothingness.

[ЮлияДектерюк]

Good afternoon, I want to thank you for such an interesting lecture. I am Yuliya Dekteryuk from the NIS Chemistry group.
1. Plato from the very beginning promoted the idea of ​​an ideal society, which is set out in the essay "The State". He considered it necessary to divide society into three rigid castes, which will have differences in the degree of nobility, and it is the rulers who have literally total power over society, to which such a state of affairs will only benefit. Plato believed that education should be entirely under the control of the state, which in turn will restore what has been lost over many centuries, namely the prototype of a person, which, in his opinion, is an ideal state. He was sure that every person would agree with him, but during his life he realized that this was not at all the case. He realized that even a simple layman, who has a lot of difficulties, from which he is accordingly dissatisfied, does not have enough of this discontent to at least limit his freedom to some extent. Plato traveled three times to Syracuse to convince the tyrant who ruled there to build an ideal model of the state in his opinion. But he did not agree. but Plato did not abandon his idea, the failures that he met on his way further confirmed him in the correctness of his thoughts. We can see this in the content of his book "Laws", where he, using the example of the colony of Crete, shows the ideal structure of the state. The basic principle is that everything is based on the rigid power of the government of this state.
The image of the cave is an interesting description of Plato's idea of ​​freedom, which in fact can be suspicious for non-ruling people. The philosopher suggested that people do not value at all that freedom, which is called real, but that which they themselves consider as such. And it is real freedom in everything that can scare them rather than give joy. To illustrate this relationship between true and imaginary values, he used the image of a cave, where people take the shadows on the walls for real things, and if one of them is placed in the real world, he will not be able to perceive the real for the real, since the real in his understanding is in a cave on the walls. And if this one person, who has known the real world, returns to the cave and tells others about it, they will not believe him.
I think Plato came to the conclusion that people do not need freedom as such, because many simply cannot cope with it and chaos will ensue. It is much more profitable and more productive to give people a rigid framework and educate a noble society.
2. To be honest, I rarely think about such abstract concepts, because then the insignificance of human consciousness becomes apparent when trying to comprehend such phenomena. I used to look at almost everything from a scientific point of view, because that way I feel more secure than when I realize that no one can comprehend the true meaning of these words. "Nothing" in my perception is a non-existent concept. More precisely, he has a name, but it so happened that it literally means nothing. It's a little difficult. In mathematics there is no concept of "nothing", there are infinitely decreasing numbers. Therefore, when realized in philosophy, the concept of "nothing" becomes for me precisely this exciting and unpleasant feeling of the impossibility of presenting a material something for this concept. The same situation is with the concept of emptiness. Being can be understood from the point of view of the material, although there are difficulties in this too. It is something intangible, but at the same time it is not the concept of "nothing".
3. This slogan can motivate for even greater study of something, namely, the comprehension of the possibility of corners of our human consciousness. But on the other hand, the realization that there is an immense amount of information in the world that even the whole of humanity is unable to assimilate, instills in us disappointment and anxiety and demotivation to do anything in principle. This is where our learning comes from. Let's take the amount of information we know. This is not the concept of "nothing" in comparison with our environment, with our friends and classmates. But, if we consider the correlation of our knowledge with the amount of information in the whole world, and here we must cover the estimated amount of information that not a single person on the planet has yet studied, then it becomes clear that we do not know anything.

[co-a]

Thank you for an interesting lecture. I'm Satubaldina Alida from bioengineering group

“I know that I don’t know anything, ” this phrase of the ancient Greek thinker Socrates. It is said that after this phrase he added: "But others do not know this and this." What makes you think about true knowledge and whether there is that very end at which each person could say: “Yes, I really know a lot, but there is a lot, I know absolutely everything!”

This phrase implies that the more you know, the more questions arise. Accordingly, a person who knows a lot understands that there are so many unknown and interesting things around. It turns out that the more we study, the more we begin to realize that we know nothing. That the world is so rich and amazing that there is simply no way to know it, neither in terms of means, nor in time.

[АяулымАдашханова]

Thank you for an interesting lecture. I am Rozikulova Zhanat, tourism group.
1. The philosopher imagined a society rigidly divided into three castes, neglecting the nobility.
The rulers make sure that the number of noble people in society does not decrease. Education, according to Plato, should be in the hands of the state. In the society that Plato depicted, the state system absolutely dominates the individual. It was assumed . that a person will treat with understanding the rational activity of the state to recreate its prototype.
2. For me, these words are associated with inner, spiritual devastation. There are different situations in a person's life, and the person himself chooses how to react to it. Some events can cause these empty spaces in us. A person with an empty inner world will be so broken that he may stop living altogether. When a person does not know what he wants from this life, does not understand the meaning of his existence, does not know what he is intended for at all.
3. In my opinion, your subject, in general, your given knowledge plays an important role in the life of every person. Here you can find answers to many questions. Your subject has become an impetus for me personally to learn more about myself and about this world in general. After all, Socrates did not say in vain: If you do not know yourself, you will never know this World. We very often use terms like self-development, self-realization in everyday life. And I believe that our generation will only go in this direction.
4. Unfortunately, in Kazakhstan, many more factors of philosophy may not be accepted by people. After all, the older generation has some missed points that can affect the perception of philosophy. But we are moving towards this, even if in slow steps. It is important for us to be versatile, to learn something new every time, to develop so that our country reaches the best heights and levels.
5. Honestly, I find it difficult to answer this question. Because both options can be reasonable and have their own traits.

[aigerimzharmagambetova]

Good evening, thank you for this interesting lecture. I'm Zharmagambetova Aigerim from biotechnology NIS 1st course.
1.Plato as a philosopher explored justice, beauty and equality and as a student of Socrates he was against democracy. He believed that democracy makes people selfish and makes them think about money, personal desires more instead of assisting people. He claimed that democracy limits a person's freedom and that democracy is not the best form of a government. Plato, as a student of Socrates, was concerned about his death because of democratical chosen teacher who was killed by these people. Technically he died because of the poison, however, misunderstanding of people forced him to die. So, from this perspective of view Plato beleived that democrasy is not the best form of the government.


2. It can sound weird, however, “nothing”, “not-Being” or “emptiness” are the words that fulfill my mind. Emptiness- is a state of soul, when I think that everything goes right, however, you feel this empty hole in your body and nothing can fill it. Not-Being is more about philosophical thought about life itself. Not-Being is not only about physical perspective and also about some spirituality or all things non-existent in reality, non-existent reality. Opposie to this Being is a thing's physical or immaterial existence. Being is a notion that contains both objective and subjective aspects of existence. Anything that joins in being is also referred to as a "being."


3. “Scio me nihil scire”- I know that I know nothing in one of the most popular lines of Socrates.Socrates during his life tried to explore the world and many things. He taught his students without getting money for this and was blamed for his actions. He was claimed as a wise person by Oracul, however, he knew that it is impossible, he knew that he can not know everything and this what made him special in this way. He was shocked about people who thought that they were the smartest because he knew that there is no person who knows everything. Even now this line is relevant for everyone, it is interesting that humankind reached so many achievements. Even though we are not quite sure about our knowledge, we always pass exams in order to be sure about it, however, it is impossible to recognize one wiseman. We can not be sure about a certain thing, problem and so on because there are always different perspectives of view and the world is changing.


4. Our ancestors were nomads, therefore, they were interconnected with nature and with everything that is related to it. Kazakh people believed in the power of dead ancestors and it is important for them to show respect for their spirits. There were different traditions and rituals that were connected to it. Also, kazaks were more focused on activity, their ideological orientations were based on objective-practition. In terms of independence, the first and main mission of Kazakhstan's philosophy was the active development to the deep philosophy of the Kazakhs, the restoration of the distinctive national vision of the world with its value and life-purpose qualities.


5.Philosophy is one of the hardest subjects to understand and there are many ways of its perception. I think that it is hard for me to choose only one direction because I can agree with many of them. I mean I can not be about one direction because I try to accept everything. For instance, materialism is more about the subject of matter and less about spiritual things. Opposite to this realism proposes that reality exists in ideas. So, I think that even if I were a philosopher I would pay more attention to asian philosophy because I want to make Asian culture popular.


6.There are 4 paradoxes of Zeno of Elea. One of them, Zeno’s arrow, demonstrates that the concept of discontinuous change is paradoxical. Because both continuous and discontinuous change are paradoxical, so is any change.The Zeno's Arrow Paradox takes a unique method to questioning the consistency of our common sense ideas of time and motion. Consider how you would tell an arrow that is fixed in space from one that is traveling through space if you just saw a snapshot of each. Is there going to be a difference? According to Aristotle, a traveling arrow must occupy an area equal to itself during any instant based on Zeno's "assumption that time is made of moments." That is, it is at the location where it is at any indivisible time or instant. However, places do not change. So, if the arrow occupies an area equal to itself at each instant, the arrow is not traveling in that moment. It is not moving because it does not have time to move; it is merely present at the location. It cannot move throughout the instant since it would necessitate an even smaller unit of time, yet the moment is undivided. The same logic applies to any other point throughout the arrow's so-called "flight." As a result, the arrow never moves.

[akszx]

Good morning, dear Laura Turarbek! I would like to thank you for the interesting lecture! I am Kaiyrgali Altynay from Chemistry NIS. Here is my answers for questions, hope you will enjoy!
1) Democracy is a political system based on the method of collective decision-making with equal influence of participants on the outcome of the process or on its essential stages. The people are the only legitimate source of power. However, the philosophical teachings of Plato and all the philosophers of ancient Greece differed from the modern concept of democracy. The fact is that now the rights of every citizen of the country are equal and anyone can run to become the leader of the country, while according to Plato, people should be carefully prepared and trained to become the leader. In addition, votes are based on popularity, not on real skills. I believe that democracy from Plato's point of view is confirmed by his works, where he described the negative impact of democracy on youth and society. Also, I would like to give an example from his writings, where he openly described democracy as a "huge beast" "Democracy... It is carried out when the poor, having won, destroy some of their opponents, expel others and equalize the rest in civil rights and in the replacement of public offices, which in a democratic system happens mainly by lot. It would seem that democracy is the best state system, because complete freedom reigns, everyone does what they want and arranges life to their liking. But this impression is deceptive: there is no justice in democracy, because power goes to those on whom the lot accidentally fell or who "discovered their disposition to the crowd." The trouble with democracy is that by proclaiming equality in rights, it equalizes the unequal by nature.

2) For me, these concepts of nothingness, emptiness have expanded my knowledge, because these concepts have turned my visions in life upside down. When we say that there is nothing, it is necessary first of all to establish ourselves in the thought that there is no ourselves as a cognizing subject, and, secondly, there is no object of cognition. As the Buddhist philosopher Nagarjuna said: "The concept of "I", which by virtue of delusion means attachment to existence and indicates a false conceit of the type of "I am". The very concept of "non-existence" is ambiguous in many ways, since in form it means the negation of being and, therefore, is secondary to being. But there is no one to deny in this case and there is nothing. "I don't deny anything, because there is nothing to be denied. There are no things, and therefore there is no comprehension, " Nagarjuna explained. When we adopt the term "emptiness", other problems arise. Firstly, stable associations with a physical vacuum, which, as it turns out, is not really empty.
The idea is as follows: we don't live our lives – they are lived. It only seems to us that we are deciding something, making a choice, planning a movement in one direction or another, but in fact we are not deciding or determining anything. We are under the illusion that we are the authors of our thoughts, but thoughts come from a source incomprehensible and beyond our control. One thought spontaneously arises in our consciousness and goes away without being realized in action, and another may, for unclear reasons, capture us and lead us in some direction.

3) “Scio me nihil scire” - «I know that I know nothing» - a saying attributed to the ancient Greek philosopher Socrates (according to the philosopher Plato). Socrates explained his thought this way: people usually assume that they know something, but it turns out that they don't know anything. Those people who shout about their knowledge and wisdom are actually empty inside. Thus, it turns out that, knowing about his ignorance, a person knows more than everyone else. It would seem that the statement contains a logically contradictory statement: if a person does not know anything, he cannot know about what he does not know. This is a kind of attempt to formulate the principle of cognitive modesty.

4) The philosophy of the Kazakh people mainly interacts with nature and all living things. Often people believed and trusted nature, considered it their salvation, amulet and teacher. They grazed cattle and took care of animals, and even when they turned their food, they talked du'a about sacrificing to God. This philosophy is widely described in the inscriptions of the Turkic peoples. There were many people in Kazakh philosophy who played a huge role in its formation, like an Kaigi, who is considered the first who laid the foundations of the state structure of the Kazakh Khanate. he traveled a lot and wrote about the correct, rational use of natural components. Asan Kaigi travels around China, Kashgar, Kokand, Khiva, Bukhara, visits the Russians and even includes the coast of the Caspian Sea and the Ural River in his route. When Asan reached the Chu River, he said:"The banks of this river are swampy and overgrown with reeds, which (hide) tigers. Children will be sick here from (bad) water. The knife here will always be unsheathed... and the women here will always be strangers (captured by enemies)."
Eastern wisdom has also been taken into account in the works describing "Hikmet". Kazakh culture and customs carry the history and values of the people, which at one time were supported by the philosophy and faith of those eras.

5) If I were a philosopher, then most likely I would not be a materialist, but an idealist, because materialists are convinced that the material is primary and objective, while consciousness, thinking, and the spiritual are the derivatives of this form of being. Consciousness depends on the material and is subordinate to it. In contrast, the idealistic orientation recognizes the primacy of thinking, consciousness, and ideas. The most important thing for me is the inner feeling, inner harmony and balance, rather than the outside. Because I am convinced from my life experiences that if you have "porridge cooking" inside, disorder, then the outside world will seem to you the same rotten chaos. There is a philosophy that we reflect what is inside us, for this reason idealism is mentally closer to me than materialism.

6. Provide a solution for one of Zeno of Elea’s paradoxes
One of the famous paradoxes of Zeno of Elea is the "Arrow", which denies the possibility of movement of an arrow fired from a bow. I would like to make a decision through the example position of A.D. Nikolenko. 1. Objects are precisely localized in time and space.
2. Space and time can be divided into intervals.
3. These intervals have the property of additivity.
4. The concepts of "speed of movement", "time" and "space" can be connected by simple unambiguous relations
As a result, he comes to the conclusion that within the framework of Zeno's logic, the paradox is not solvable. To overcome it, Nikolenko suggests not to refute it, but to limit its scope. He argues that for this it is necessary to recognize the following theses:
1. The movement is not continuous.
2. Motion does not have the property of additivity.
This is exactly what motion is in the framework of quantum mechanics. When a segment of space is divided into quantities smaller than the Planck length, the laws of the micro (quantum) world begin to operate.

[АйгеримМусаканова]

Good evening, thank you for such an interesting lecture. I’m Kashaganova Aigerim from restaurant and hotel business group, second course

1. There are several reasons why Plato was an anti-democrat philosopher, but let’s begin with the one that is connected to what we’ve learned in previous lessons - death of Socrates. The death of Socrates has shown Plato the flaws of democracy of that time. Let’s not forget that the democracy at the time was not similar to democracy we are used to nowadays. There were no professional judges, prosecutors and attorneys - Socrates life was decided by almost a nameless crowd. And the definition of democracy as “everyone is equal and everyone can be a judge and a politician” was the problem for Plato. He believed that every occupation should be filled with people who have the required qualification, knowledge and professionalism while at the time people viewed democracy differently.

2. To be honest, I don’t really think a lot about the role of “nothing, not-being, emptiness” in my life - people and I as one of them tend to concentrate more on things that “are” and surround our lives. But the topic of “nothing, not-being and emptiness” is the one that everyone thinks about from time to time: “What’s there after we die? What if there’s nothing? Who is the god? What if there is no such thing as god? What’s there beyond the borders of the Universe? Nothing again? What’s the reason to live? What if there is no real reason?». I personally perceive the idea of “nothing, not-being and emptiness” with a bit of estrangement because it’s not fun, it has dark background and prevents from supporting optimistic lifestyle.

3. “I know that I know nothing” is a famous expression of Socrates. The fact that such a powerful phrase was said by such a wise philosopher adds significance to it. I understand the expression as “it doesn’t matter how much knowledge you have - it will never be enough to stop learning”. Indeed, nowadays it’s really easy to find out how ANYTHING works - just open up your smartphone and almost always the answer is there, but if we don’t have our devices with us then we can barely explain how clouds form or why lightnings strike. Meteorologists can explain it, but they can’t explain how exactly a human brain works, a neurologists can explain it, but they can’t explain how to extract oil from the bottom of a sea or an ocean. The idea is that it doesn’t matter how masterful you are at something - there are thousands and thousands of other fields that you’ll never be able to master.

4. I believe that traditions and culture of our nation are unique. We are Asians and mostly have Asian hints to our appearance, but we don’t use hieroglyphs, don’t eat rice so much, instead we eat horses, we are mostly Muslims, have a turkic language, but speak mostly Russian. Thus our philosophy and culture are a mix of something we had naturally, from the beginning and something that was taken and learnt from other cultures during different time events.

[altynaytaiyr]

Hello! Thank you for such an interesting lecture. Taiyr Altynay Biotechnology NIS 21-10

1.Historical sensitivity enables us to comprehend the nuances of the current society in which we live, while keeping in mind that it has not always been like this. Everything that distinguishes modern society, such as industrialization, urbanization, the formation of nation-states, and the dominance of secular values, ocurred relatively recent times, and for the majority of their history, people lived quite diversely — in small, identity, and customarily thinking societies. We must continuously compare current civilization to cultures from the past in order to analyze the changes that have occurred. He said in his discourse "The State" that democracy is the unjust authority of the majority since it is the equality of all persons in power, regardless of their particular traits. He scorned Athenian democracy, claiming that it was full of chaotic communities that lacked internal cohesion.

2. When a person thinks about "Not existing, " it is difficult for him to believe that his parents did not meet and that he did not emerge at all; he has a dread of what it feels like not to exist at all, as mentioned in earlier lectures. This is a perfectly natural emotion for a person. When some philosophers consider it the primary of the entire world, or present it to nirvana, when others argue that non-existence came from being, emptiness is also perceived by a person as the lack of any things or substance.
Being and non-being, in my perspective, are in harmony with one another and produce one another, and none is dependent on the other. Emptiness, on the other hand, is not at all a bad place. Although it is commonly assumed that emptiness is frightening or harmful (in some religions, emptiness is a form of execution), emptiness is important for understanding "different cultural types of thinking" and awareness of oneself and the world around one. Without emptiness, there would be no opposite side of fullness to grasp the lack of something or the denial of something.

3. Socrates lived in a world where just a little amount of knowledge had been acquired. From Socrates' point of view, any knowledge or information he possessed was likely to be little (or perhaps wrong) in comparison to the amount of information that remained to be found. It's simpler to state "I know that I know nothing" that the more technical "I only have the slightest amount of information, and even that is probably erroneous" from such a perspective. If we compare ourselves to humans 200-300 years in the future, the same idea still applies to ourselves. And, unlike Socrates, we have access to a vast library of knowledge at our disposal at any time. "I'm quite aware that I don't know anything." That is, confirmation of a lack of knowledge triggers the development process itself, which might persist indefinitely. The more a person learns, the more aware they become of the growing amount of unknown knowledge. And when a person acknowledges that he knows nothing, he becomes smart, since the quest of knowledge then becomes an endless, lifetime-long search for information.

4. Materialists believe that the material is the primary and objective state of existence, with awareness, reasoning, and spirituality as derivatives. Consciousness is dependent on and subordinate to the material. The idealistic viewpoint, on the other hand, accepts the centrality of thinking, awareness, and ideas. Everything material, everything that exists, is a result of awareness, hence the outward world reflects the interior. The outward world and things are projections of our interior processes, a mixture of our sensory impressions, and the only genuine and actual thing is what we perceive, feel, and realize. The subject of the relationship between thinking and being differs in a variety of ways in both directions, and it is worth discussing them individually.

5. Philosophy is one of the most difficult disciplines to grasp, and there are many different perspectives on it. I believe it will be difficult for me to select just one path because I can agree with several of them. I mean, I can't be all about one thing because I want to be open to everything. Materialism, for example, is more concerned with the subject of matter than with spiritual matters. Realism, on the other hand, believes that reality exists only in ideas. So, even if I were a philosopher, I believe I would pay more attention to Asian philosophy if I wanted to popularize Asian culture. In philosophy, materialism states that the only thing that exists is matter or energy, that everything is made up of material, and that everything is the outcome of material interaction. For example, the founder of western metaphysics, Parmenides of Elea, was a materialist philosopher. While idealism implies that reality exists only in the minds of people, that everyone should be flawless, and that it is dependent on mental activity, it also implies that reality exists only in the minds of people. Plato is a well-known idealist philosopher. In this instance, I'm not sure whether I could be a philosopher at all; nonetheless, if we were to suppose, I'd prefer to be a materialism philosopher because we can establish materialistic beliefs using physics or metaphysics in some way.

6. For a long time, people have attempted to answer Zeno's paradoxes; among these people, Aristotle comes to mind. He was able to explain one of Zeno's paradoxes involving the turtle and Achilles to some extent; nonetheless, the notion of infinity is distinguishable among them, because Zeno wanted philosophical solutions whereas Aristotle described using mathematical elements. Zeno was a great mathematician who was known for his impossible-to-solve paradoxes. The story of Achilles and the turtle is one of many paradoxes. Of course, there are many disagreements about these paradoxes; some even claim that they are nonsensical; yet, the meaning of this paradox is that the quickest creature cannot catch up to the slowest; for example, the tortoise will never catch up to Achilles. When Achilles arrives at the turtle, it will already be moving forward a little. Even Achilles will swiftly close the gap; the turtle, on the other hand, will move a bit further ahead. As a result, it will go on indefinitely. When Achilles arrives at the location where the turtle was in front of him, it will be at least a little bit ahead of him.

[АяжанСадыкова]

Good afternoon! I would like to proceed and answer last three questions. Sadykova Ayazhan, Biology NIS, 21-13.

4. The ancient Kazakhs led a nomadic lifestyle and constantly changed their location, besides, the location of the country is located almost in the heart of the continent of Eurasia, between Asia and Europe. Eastern philosophy develops in close cooperation with religion: often the same philosophical trend appears both as philosophy proper and as religion. An example of this is Brahmanism, Hinduism, Buddhism, Confucianism. Western philosophy is more committed to scientific methodology and dissociates itself from religion. The first steppe philosopher was called Asan Kaigi, who read that the earth is the main, fundamental concept in the history of the formation of national consciousness, the perception of the people. Succinctly, expressively, Asan Kaigi recreates the image of the future, wishing to prepare descendants for difficulties, to form in them a sense of responsibility for the fate of the state. At all times, sages have been the spiritual guides of successive generations. In this we can say that his philosophy was somewhat similar to European philosophy, which focused more on the future than on the past, as if accumulating and creating knowledge for future generations. On the other hand, Kazakh philosophy was also somewhat connected with religious belief in the spirits of ancestors, in the sky, in the surrounding nature, and in this it was extremely similar to Eastern philosophy. For example, Haidar Dulati, relying on the well-known works of thinkers of his era, made a brilliant analysis of one of the main themes of philosophical anthropology - the problem of sin. He divides sin into two categories. Dulati divides the first category of sin into seven types: disbelief, murder, slander, abuse of orphans, usury, stupidity, disrespectful attitude to parents. The second category of sin is classified according to the following seventeen signs: four types of sin are attributed to the heart, four are related to the tongue, two to the hands, the next two to the genitals, one sin is produced by the feet, and the next is related to the flesh.

5. Recently, I have been very interested in the topic of human consciousness, its power and quantum reality, within which this very consciousness exists. I am attracted by the idea that the whole world is a collection of various waves and frequencies that are in continuous motion, as well as the human mind, therefore, in fact, with the help of his thoughts, which are also a collection of waves and frequencies, a person has the power to change the reality around him. For this reason, I think that if I were a philosopher, the idea of idealism would be much closer to me than materialism, namely subjective materialism.

6. Zeno's second paradox stated: the fleet-footed Achilles will never be able to catch up with the turtle, because Achilles must first run to the place from where the turtle started moving, and during this time she will crawl forward a little to a new place. Achilles will have to run to this new place, but the turtle will crawl forward at least a little during this time. As a result, it turns out that the turtle will always be some distance ahead of Achilles. It is claimed that "the turtle will always be ahead", but what does "always" mean? Endless time? However, Achilles runs faster. Each time he needs to cover a shorter distance than in the previous step. That is, the time of "catching up" is an infinitesimal value. And when infinitely large faces an infinitesimal then the result does not have to be infinite. It is not infinite.
Let's assume that Achilles runs 10 times faster (at a speed of 10 m / s) and the distance to the turtle is at first 1000 meters. He will run these 1000 meters in 100 seconds. Meanwhile, the nimble turtle will overcome 100 meters. Achilles will run these 100 meters in 10 seconds. The turtle will go forward 10 meters. Achilles will run these 10 meters in 1 second.

[xdodgexd]

Thank you for lecture and curious questions.


Onlanbay Dana from tourism group, 2nd year


1. why do you think Plato was an anti-democrat philosopher?


Because his teacher was Socrates. And as we know, Socrates was convicted by an Athenian court and sentenced to death. Plato, along with other students, tried to influence the court's decision and save Socrates, but when nothing came of it, he left Athens and went on a journey for many years. After that, it prompted Plato to become an anti-democrat, and Socrates himself was an anti-democrat. Another argument of Plato's anti-democracy: "Under a democratic system, citizens who are obedient to the authorities are mixed with dirt as worthless voluntary slaves, but rulers who look like subordinates and subordinates who look like rulers are praised and revered there”


2. What role does “nothing”, “not being” or “emptiness” play in your personal worldview


Let me become a philosopher.
For me, “emptiness” is something that can be full of something concrete but at the same time can become empty, it's like a changeable state. For example, glass can be full of water and can be empty.
According to Democritus, “not being” is being, filling, and permeating it. This is also explained by physicists because everything, being, matter consists of atoms. For my worldview, this is also perceived as described above.
There is “nothing” there, if it existed, they would not invent a word for it explaining that nothing exists. Because the "nothing" non-objective refers to the sphere of absolute non-existence (which is infinite) and it will be infinite with this world.


3. How can you translate the slogan of my channel? How do you understand this statement?


Many things can be in doubt, for example, a train is moving at a speed of 200 kilometers per hour in the direction of the station, and there is a passenger in it, a passenger is running at a speed of 5 km / h relative to the train in the direction of its movement. If an observer standing on a railway embankment wanted to measure the speed of this passenger, it would not be exactly 200 + 5= 205 kilometers per hour but would be lower by only 0.17 nanometers per hour. But even the instruments can be wrong, they cannot calculate everything perfectly. So we can't know anything for sure because even 1+1=2 is not equal to 2. After all, there are no identical things, although there may exist, we don't know about them.


4. How do you understand the position of kazakh philosophy (kazakh culture, kazakh traditional culture) within the framework western or eastern tradition?


Analyzing the history of world philosophy as a whole and the correlation of Kazakh philosophy with it, the famous Kazakh philosopher, academician G. Yesim comes to interesting conclusions. In particular, he believes that there is no world philosophy, but there are separate ethnic (national) philosophical systems that make up it. Philosophy is formed on the basis of the ethnic being and mentality of the ethnos, is reflected in its language. Therefore, G. Yesim, agreeing with M. Heidegger's opinion (language is the house of the truth of being), believes that it is impossible to comprehend philosophy without knowing the language of the ethnos.


5. If you were a philosopher, would you be a materialist or another one? Why?


if I became a philosopher, then I would not be tied to any direction of philosophy. After all, I already belong to certain things and situations like family, city, nationality, etc. Therefore, to avoid attachment to anything, I would not have carried myself in any direction. I didn't even study other directions because it could change my opinion and my judgment about something and again I would award something to myself. Why? Because my wisdom was in this, not to burden myself with anything to live by choosing freedom that in the end will still bind me to something.


6. Provide a solution for one of Zeno of Elea’s paradoxes?


Flying Arrow
The movement is relative and in this case it is possible to study the movement of one body by one parameter. Comparison of measurement results by several parameters at once leads to ambiguity of the results and the impossibility of comparing them and moves from the relative to the absolute region (where there is no movement).
When studying the process of body movement, only one measurement system is possible, it is possible to study the process of only one parameter of body movement, considering the movement of more than two bodies leads to ambiguity of the results and the impossibility of determining the movement itself.

[alexandervashchenko]

Alexander Vashchenko, 21-13 Biology group

Question #1

Without a doubt, Plato did not support the idea of ​​democracy. In his dialogue "The State" Plato tried to highlight the idea of ​​an "ideal" state. For him, the state is an expression of the idea of ​​justice, and then the type of government in an ideal state should also be ideal. In his work, Plato compiled a scale of types of states from the best to the worst. Plato considered the best types of government to be aristocracy and monarchy, because in this type of government, the best citizens in their abilities are endowed with power. Also, the aristocracy implies equality among the most developed members of society who are involved in its management. Next in his scale is timocracy, in which power is concentrated among respected citizens who have received their power not according to their abilities, but according to their ability to gain power. Next on the scale is the oligarchy, in which only the wealthy are in power. And only then does Plato have democracy on the scale. He considers it to be perfect, because under this form of government, all powerful men are endowed with power, in which their personal qualities do not matter. And worse than democracy, Plato considers only tyranny.

[diladyyy]

Thank you for this interesting lecture, I'm Temirkyzy Dilnaz from Biotechnology NIS 21-10.
1. In the ancient theory of the three forms of government, democracy is the government of the people, the townspeople. It differs from monarchy and aristocracy. One of the first ancient thinkers to study democracy was Plato. In general, democracy was regarded by Plato as a system pleasant and varied, but not properly governed. "Equality in democracy equalizes the equal and the unequal". It is democracy that he considers "the result of the rebellion of the poor, destroying and driving out opponents and sharing power with those who remain". Democracy is called by him "the rule of numbers" and "the rule of many". According to Plato, "good or freedom destroy democracy". The bulk of the people is a crowd, incapable of governing the state fairly and effectively. Democracy inevitably leads to tyranny, as "out of the greatest freedom arises the greatest slavery". That which is a vicious state system is considered a good thing and to which it is insatiable to strive is what destroys the system.
2. Nothing and not-being. Many people tend to think of these concepts as very close. One might say identical. Both are the result of extreme generalisation. However, still, in different ways. Nothing is the result of a generalization by the absence of something, that which has a place and time to be and is, in a particular case, an empty place, like a background, a canvas, relative to which the certainty of the nothing is possible. Not-being is result of a generalization in the absence of being, existence as nothing.Also, emptiness has a deeper meaning, as there can be both inner and outer emptiness. One can feel nothing and this can include absence of meaning, sadness, apathy and boredom, longing, muted or overt anxiety. This is either inner or mental emptiness. External emptiness is when everything around you is empty, there is no meaning or idea. These all play a role in different ways in my life. It most often depends on the situation.
3. Everything is changing and expanding these days. That is why one cannot know everything in one field. I think that knowing what you don't know helps you to focus on the areas where you are weak. That way you can expand your consciousness and your mind. This Socratic phrase is explained in the way that people usually think that they know something, but it turns out that they know nothing. So it turns out that by being aware of my ignorance, I know more than everyone else. A person should not stand in one place. On the contrary, he must develop and broaden his horizons. You should not say that you know everything in this world. There are many things in life that we have to learn.
4. The system of spiritual culture of the Kazakhs began with the ancient elements of philosophical thought and in modern times formed the basis of a full-blooded classical philosophy. Kazakh philosophy is not just a philosophical system showing the peculiarities of a certain ethnos. It is a worldview based on and "speaking" the Kazakh language. The traditional culture of the Kazakhs is defined by their economy and nomadic way of life. The connection with nature and living beings was of great importance for the nomads. Traditional nomadic culture emphasizes virtual personal rhythms of being as well. Human life is seen as a transition from the current, superficial state. Man in this life is given a chance to join with eternity. The main condition is to be human. The peculiarities of the Kazakh philosophy consist of natural forces, customs, and social laws. Also, the basis of philosophy was a myth, but the myth was transformed through the epic and was used in a systematized form. Folk wisdom is one of the aspects of Kazakh philosophy. Thanks to folk wisdom, various conflicts and political issues were solved. All this distinguishes Kazakh philosophy from Western and Eastern philosophies. It’s known that eastern culture is more depended on spiritual culture like a religion, while Western culture’s main concept is activity and it is depend on individuality.
5. I am not a philosopher, but if I were, I would consider myself an idealist. Idealism has its origins in ancient philosophy. One of the first apologists for this approach was Plato. They represented the direction of objective idealism and recognized the existence of a certain soul which gave birth to everything and dominates over everything material. It is thanks to this ideal, immaterial, psychic element that man can understand abstract and immaterial phenomena, be guided by ethics and morality, have high feelings and experience spiritual experiences. I believe that matter is just a thing and man, through his feeling and sensation, attaches meaning to these matters. Human feeling and psychology and state of mind are more important than matter.

[ЮлияДектерюк]

Dekteryuk Yuliya, Chemistry NIS
6. Clever Achilles will catch up and overtake the tortoise. There is a difference between the Achilles and the tortoise in the time of onset(S). The tortoise begins its journey (with the speed of VL) and Achilles (with the speed of VA). To catch up with the tortoise, Achilles needs to focus not on the tortoise's path, but on the time it takes to catch up with it. Imagine the situation that in the French time tx the tortoise traveled the path S*, and Achilles managed to reach the tortoise in the same time (C+C*). Then VAtx = S* + S, and VLtx=S*, VAtx = S + VLtx; VAtx - VLtx, = S; tx(VA - VL) = S, tx = S/(VA - VL). If we take a time that is greater than tx, then Achilles will overtake the tortoise.

[ackerman_]

Thank you for your lecture. Gumarova Aminat from Tourism group, 2nd year.
1. Why do you think Plato was an anti-democrat philosopher?
One of the reasons why Plato was an anti - democrat is because democracy in Ancient Greece worked on the principle that any citizen (men), who had reached a certain age could vote and even be elected to any government job. According to Plato, people in power should be specially selected and trained.
The second reason was that he openly despised the court of the crowd. He said that the crowd is a "huge beast." In order to explain my point of view, I will give an example of his eloquent definition of democracy: "Democracy... It is carried out when the poor, having won, will destroy some of their opponents, expel others, and equalize the rest in civil rights and in the replacement of public offices, which in a democratic system happens mostly by lot. It would seem that democracy is the best state system, because complete freedom reigns, everyone does what they want and arranges life to their liking. But this impression is deceptive: in a democracy, there is no justice, because power goes to those on whom the lot accidentally fell or who "discovered their disposition to the crowd. The trouble with democracy is that by proclaiming equality in rights, it equalizes the unequal by nature. In addition, in a democracy, laws do not actually apply and there is no proper governance. People who do not want to obey - do not obey, do not want to fight when others are fighting - do not fight, etc.; those sentenced to death or exile walk free. The laws are not taken into account there, so as not to have any master over them."
From his words, it can be clearly understood that anyone who had some weight in the crowd at that time could influence the crowd and they decided the whole fate of whether a person, whether a country, which is not always good. Sometimes the choice of the crowd entails huge consequences.

2. What role does “nothing”, “not-being”, or “emptiness” play in your personal worldview?
Well, "not-being” is a philosophical concept that means: 1) the absence of anything, 2) all things that do not exist in reality. The form of manifestation of being is "something", and not-being manifests itself in the form of "nothing".
To be honest, when I read about the concepts of "nothing", "not-being" and "emptiness", I was a little drawn to a sense of pessimism, frankly speaking. I am far from understanding philosophy, but I can say in anti-philosophical language, that these concepts do not play a role in my life. More concretely, I am more impressed with "being", which means the material or immaterial existence of a thing. Everything that participates in being is also called a "being", although this usage is often limited to entities possessing subjectivity ("human being").

3. How can you translate the slogan of my channel? How do you understand this statement?
Your slogan on the channel means: I know that I know nothing.
If we interpret the words of Socrates in terms of the 21st century, it means that people cannot know everything in the world and those who naively or or out of their self-confidence think otherwise are fools. Usually such people don't know anything. They can live their whole life with their meager knowledge and remain ignorant. On the other hand, people who admit that they really don't know anything, knowing about their ignorance, paradoxically begin to replenish their knowledge and be smarter than everyone else.

4. How do you understand the position of Kazakh philosophy (Kazakh culture, traditional culture) within the framework of Western or Eastern traditions?
Kazakh philosophy appeared much later than Western and Eastern philosophy. It is true that it has absorbed much of the teachings of these two philosophies, but still has some of its own characteristics. The characteristic features of Kazakh philosophy are: a specific form of expression of philosophical thought, a large role of moral and moral problems, concreteness, loyalty to the common people.
Kazakh philosophy, unlike eastern philosophical teachings, is characterized by a synthetic introverted-extroverted character, which determines its reverent attitude to nature, life, openness to the world, cosmocentrism (Turkic mentality).
According to Chokan Valikhanov, the very first Kazakh philosopher is Asan Kaigi, who believed that the earth is the main, fundamental concept in the history of the formation of national identity, in the perception of the people. Moreover, the roots of Kazakh philosophy consist of edifications (The Words of Abai's edification). In all Abai's works, the main idea is the love for man and nature.
In conclusion, Kazakh philosophy differs from Eastern and Western in that it also includes elements of nature worship and respect.

5. If you were a philosopher, would you be a materialistic one or an idealist one? Why?
I consider myself a materialist. Why? Because in my understanding, the world is material, substantial – everything exists objectively, regardless of consciousness. That is, before human awareness, the earth appeared and only then living, thinking beings. Self-consciousness arose and developed in the process of awareness and perception of objectively existing reality, and is nothing more than its reflection. Thus, being determines consciousness, and nothing else. For example, I agree with the judgments of Democritus (V-IV centuries BC). According to him, everything consists of atoms - indivisible particles of matter that have existence. The movement of these very particles in the void determines the variety of forms of existing objects and phenomena.

[АяжанСадыкова]

Thank you for such an interesting lecture. I am Sadykova Ayazhan, Biology of NIS, group 21-13

1. To begin with, it is worth emphasizing that the democracy that was in Athens during Plato's lifetime was quite different from modern democracy. There were no judges or prosecutors in the courts, ordinary citizens did all this. They could bring charges, be jurors and listeners in the case and the court was decided by the vote of these citizens. In addition, Athens was a city-state, unlike the current democracy that operates throughout the country. In this regard, the influence of the people on the decisions of the city was more direct than it is now. Plato considered this system to be the penultimate in terms of imperfection, standing above only tyranny. In his dialogue "The State", he wrote that democracy is the unfair power of the majority, since it is the equality of all men in power, in which their personal qualities do not matter. He rejected Athenian democracy, saying that they were full of anarchic societies without internal unity.

2. In my worldview, nothing and something are in eternal balance, circulating, dissolving into each other. Something appeared out of nothing. Non-existence is the absence or denial of being, non-existent reality, non-existence in principle. They say that after being, that is, after existence, after life, people go into oblivion, that is, into a world where there is nothing and nothing exists, where feelings and emotions simply dissolve and are nothing more. I like this hypothesis much more than the belief that there is another life after life, where people who lived happily go to heaven, and people who did bad things during their lifetime go to hell.

3. I know that I don't know anything. According to one of Plato's earliest works, The Apology of Socrates, this is a well-known phrase of Socrates, which he uttered at the trial when charges were brought against him of defacing youth, as well as that he did not believe in Gods. Socrates said that he was recognized as the wisest of people, however, he admitted the idea that this might be a mistake and talked to other people who were called wise. However, he found that most of these wise people have superficial knowledge and at the same time claim to have wisdom. Socrates said that his wisdom lies in the fact that he admits that he knows nothing. I understand this statement in such a way that even when you have some knowledge, you need to remain open to new knowledge and never get conceited, because then a person becomes blind and loses objectivity. In addition, a person should remain so open to every new knowledge and have so much passion for learning new things, as if one doesn't know anything at all and this is one of the first knowledge person received.

[zhibekabiken]

Hello! Abiken Zhibek, Tourism, 2nd year student
So, my answers:
1) Plato is famous as an anti-democrat philosopher. Since he was affected by the death of Socrates, his teacher and mentor. Plato was struck by people who could not use talented scientists with good intentions, but instead cruelly disposed of them as if they were worthless. Therefore, Plato knew democracy as a hindrance to philosophy, he recognized knowledge as the most important quality of any person.
2) I personally do not want to believe that non-existence does not exist. For what would be the point of living if there is nothing after death? Many people, including me, believe that God exists, that he created us and everyone has their own mission. People who are trying to live the right life (me for example) they believe that they are doing good deeds because after death they will go to heaven. I believe in it, because no matter how much I think, there is no point in being then. But also, as we read in the works of Tao Te Ching in the lesson, if there is beauty, then ugliness automatically appears, if there is good, then the devil also exists. Exactly the same, I believe that since we live, since God has given us life, then there is existence after death.
3) Actually, we can't be sure of everything. All definitions of terms (for example, what is happiness or depression) are all abstract. It's all based only on people's thoughts. There is a white color, but it is considered white only because we call it that. There are negative opinions on all explanations.
4) Kazakh culture and Western traditions are very different from each other. Speaking from the point of view of Western thoughts, sexism, discrimination and Nazism of people dominate in our country. From ancient times until now, even in such a modern world, patriarchy has great power in our country, so the rights of girls are not protected, they are deprived and humiliated in family relationships, at work and in society as a whole. For example, there is a very common notion that girls are not equal to men, they cannot do business and work, they have to stay at home and have children, and men rule everything. Parents are afraid that their children will get married with people of another nationality (like my parents). And in Western concepts, the protection of the rights of any person is now very widespread. They do not divide whether you are a woman or a man, whether you are Chinese or Spanish, whether it is a white person or not.

[aishatzhaksylyk]

Thank you for this lecture! I am ZHAKSYLYK NURDANA from Biotechnology NIS 21-10.

1. Why do you think Plato was an anti-democrat philosopher?
Plato rejected Athenian democracy on the grounds that such democracies were anarchic societies with no internal unity, that they followed citizens' impulses rather than pursuing the common good, that democracies are unable to allow a sufficient number of citizens to have their voices heard, and that they are typically run by fools. Plato attacked Athenian democracies for confusing anarchy with liberty. Plato concluded that Athenian democracy was only a collection of individuals occupying a common place rather than a kind of political organization because of its lack of coherent unity. According to him, equality attracts power-hungry individuals seeking personal advantage. They have a significant potential for corruption, which can lead to dictatorship.

2. What role does “nothing”, “not-Being” or “emptiness” play in your personal worldview?
In my opinion, "nothing" is the general state of nonexistence, sometimes reified as a domain or dimension into which things pass when they cease to exist or out of which they may come to exist. For example, in some cultures God is understood to have created the universe ex nihilo, "out of nothing". “Not-Being” in my philosophical mind, is the absence of being and it differs from evil, which is the privation of being. For me, “emptiness” is a little scary concept, because I believe that if a person feels emptiness from the inside, then he cannot simply show his emotions, he cannot rejoice, nor be sad, and may even not have any motivation to live.

3. How can you translate the slogan of my channel? How do you understand this statement?
'Scio me nihil scire' (I only know that I know nothing). For me, this phrase sounds like a car engine without brakes. Because when a person does not know a lot of things, he wakes up the desire and motivation to learn everything, develop and move on without looking back.

4. How do you understand the position of Kazakh philosophy (Kazakh culture, Kazakh traditional culture) within the framework of Western or Eastern traditions?
The Kazakh philosophy includes the principle of integrity, avoiding the discord between mind and heart, and the criteria of spirituality and morality. The crisis of values of Western culture were opposed to the optimism and integrity of the Kazakh philosophy, based on the unity of Goodness, Truth and Beauty. The most important difference between Kazakh and Eastern philosophy from Western philosophy is that the first philosophy is more collective, while the second is more on an individual approach.

[akonpark]

Thank you for the lecture, I'm Sarsenova Aknur from Biotechnology NIS 21-10.
1. Plato was that person who invented classes, and special organization in government. Modern democracy differentiates from ancient Greek's, as in that period of time each person could influence on serious issues, like judgement of Socrates. Needed to mention that people blamed him for two reasons, they are promoting individualism among young generation and defying Gods. Plato was not agree with that decision, he thought there should be special judge and laws. At that time, the whole decision of court was depended on people's consideration only. There was a choas without organization.
2. When it comes to the difference between two similar terms, it is important to define each of it. Emptiness is abundance in things. Nothingness is surrender into abundance of Self. Namely, it there is a space and there is nothing, it is emptiness, means the space exists but not filled. Whereas, nothingness is about the absence of space, there is no space at all.

3. I know one thing: I know nothing. There are several theories about this quote. first one, people say it in order to get more knowledge from their environment, that's relevant. Because, any other theme gets sharper and deeper when it is investigated from other's perspective. Furhtemore, there is a belief that we cannot know everything, namely we know nothing. We caannot be sure and exact about any facts. Even the fact of our existence cannot be 100% true. we can say that I was born as a boy, so I am a man. However, we cannot answer the question why you are man. Even the fact is known, but the questions related to this fact cannot be answered at all.
4. Kazakh philosophy differs from Eastern and Western philosophy. because our ancestors were tengri. They believed in Sun, fire, in matter that they see and feel. I can talk about tengri a lot. Even the yurts where they lived, had their own meaning and role in routine for example in order to predict the time. Kazakh people mostly tried to survive and were superstitious concerning everything. They did not tried to find the value of their existence, their role in history was to survive and follow morality. The question of their existence was totally related with God.
5. I would relate myself to idealist. Due to the fact that the importance of living and existence stands primary for me. as any other idealists i do not find materialistic phenomena important in our life. Sometimes it seems like there is no even life existing, that everything surrounding me is imagination. In fact, as Socrates said i know one thing; i know nothing. We cannot be sure about our existence and that's interesting point. I try not to give a matter to materialism in my life. As everything is temporary even our life. The only thing that matters is our existence and mental state.

[dinakhozhanova]

Khozhanova Dina, from Biology NIS. Firstly, thank you for such interesting lecture and questions.
2. The meaning of “nothing” in my head resembles a view of empty, but empty in not negative side, but in positive way as a chance to full filled this emptiness with some new ideas, new skills and new knowledge. The role of these concepts gives me confidence that we are all imperfect, never complete and we shouldn’t be insecure about it

4, Materialists are convinced that the material is primary and objective, while consciousness, thinking, and the spiritual are the derivatives of this form of being.Consciousness depends on the material and is subordinate to it.

In contrast, the idealistic orientation recognizes the primacy of thinking, consciousness, and ideas. Everything material, everything that exists, was a product of consciousness, and thus the external world is a reflection of the internal. The only true and existing thing is what we feel, feel, and realize, and the external world and objects are a projection of our internal processes, a combination of our sensory sensations. In both directions, the question of the relation of thinking to being differs in a number of points, and it is worth talking about them separately.

I think that I am closer to materialism, because Materialism asserts the existence in the sphere of being of the only "absolute" substance of being — matter; all entities are formed by matter, and ideal phenomena (including consciousness) are processes of interaction of material entities. The laws of the material world apply to the whole world, including society and man.

[ЛизаЧувашова-бо]

Chuvashova Elizaveta Chemistry group
2) In my worldview, nothing has arisen from the absence of something, and by assumptions we can confirm. How do we know what it looks like or feels like? For example, a simple glass. Due to the fact that it is partially filled with water, we can say that the glass is half full or half empty. Something appeared from nothing and vice versa, nothing appeared from the absence of something.
Non-being is the absence or negation of being, a non-existent reality, non-being in principle. Most of all, it is Buddhism (the chain of rebirths) that sympathizes me with the concept of non-existence. In this religion, there is a position that after the existence and living of all lives, people go into non-existence, that is, into a world where there is nothing and nothing exists, where feelings and emotions simply dissolve and no longer represent anything. . That is, non-existence, it is fading and finding peace.

3) "I know that I know nothing". That is, confirmation of the lack of knowledge leads to the very process of development, which can last forever. The more a person learns something, the more there is an awareness that the size of unfamiliar information increases. And when a person realizes that he does not know anything, then he becomes wise, because as a result, the pursuit of knowledge turns into an eternal search for knowledge, a lifetime long.

[banutanatova]

Tanatova Gulbanu, tourism 2nd course.

Firstly, I would like to thank to questions that make to think:)
2.The German idealist philosopher G. Hegel believed that being and non-being are identical to each other. From his point of view, the world is based on two initial logical forms - pure being and pure nothing. Dialectical materialism rejects both the existence of absolute being and absolute non-being, and the concepts of pure being and pure non-being. There is no absolute non-being, since the transition of absolute non-being into being is impossible. Indeed, being already exists, and in order to generate it, absolute non-being must contain the cause of being, i.e. not to be such (absolute). If we consider "nothing" from a religious point of view, then it is said that God created the world from absolutely nothing. and my opinion is also for nihilism that it is from nothing that something and non-existence gives rise to being.
3.Your channel slogan means “I know that I know nothing.” So what did Socrates mean by the phrase “I know that I know nothing”:
1) There is human (limited) and divine (limitless) wisdom.
2) Man, the wisest of all after God, does not think that he knows what he does not know. Here's what google says. Scientists say that our brain works only at 4-5%. Now imagine that you know and do not know a lot of things. Even the scientists themselves have a brain that works at 5-8%. Types of people are divided into the following categories: those who know that they know nothing, those who do not know that they do not know anything, and those who simply do not know anything. Understanding and accepting what you don't know is the level of wisdom.
4.The Kazakh society is characterized by philosophizing in non-philosophical forms at the level of worldview universals that shape human activity. Historical analysis shows that the Kazakh traditional culture from utopia was forced to focus on anti-utopia. Despite the heroic ages, the idea of ​​"Gulstan" (the land of flowers) and "Zheruyuk" (the land of prosperity) was replaced by the idea of ​​"Zar zaman" (the era of sadness). The Kazakh utopia originates from the period of the crisis of the nomadic uluses of Chingizids (Saif Sarai. Gul-stan). This idea received its classical expression in the work of the “first Kazakh philosopher” (Ch. Valikhanov). “Jeru-yuk” of Asan Kaigy is characterized by a special ambivalence: “earthly paradise” is harmony and order, nature and man, mortality and immortality, tradition and innovation. In my opinion, Kazakh philosophy is more like Eastern philosophy than Western. All our philosophers who were born in the Kazakh steppe such as Abay, Mashkhur Zhusip, they knew more about the east. Eastern philosophy is closely connected with religion and this is the similarity of Kazakh philosophy with the eastern one.
5.Of course, I am not a philosopher to condemn all this. And I think I would not dare to choose one of them. I have 50/50 thoughts .But I believe in God.It is virtually the same thing to state that spirit is primordial or that nature was created by God. Anyone who believes nature has always existed is denying its creation, the emerging from nothing. Anyone who acknowledges that nature is boundless, that it has no beginning or end, denies the existence of anything outside of nature, above nature, that is, God. And here is materialism in action. Those who understand that nature had a beginning in time, on the other hand, conclude that there was a period when nature, matter, did not exist.Whoever proves that the universe and nature are finite in space and time acknowledges the presence of something outside of nature and matter. As a result, there is just one step from the idealistic claim that matter arose from the non-material, the spirit, to the idealistic assertion that matter emerged from the non-material, the spirit.It is evident that the idealistic concept of a supernatural, superhuman awareness, or spirit, eventually aligns with the traditional theological concept of God. As a result, idealistic philosophy is consistent with religion, both in its beginning point and in its end conclusions.