{"id":7621,"date":"2025-11-16T21:28:40","date_gmt":"2025-11-16T18:28:40","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/klasikdusunceokulu.com\/?page_id=7621"},"modified":"2025-11-16T21:28:40","modified_gmt":"2025-11-16T18:28:40","slug":"oguz-haslakoglu-herakleitos-ve-parmenides-atolyesi-28-seminer-ozeti","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/klasikdusunceokulu.com\/index.php\/oguz-haslakoglu-herakleitos-ve-parmenides-atolyesi-28-seminer-ozeti\/","title":{"rendered":"O\u011eUZ HA\u015eLAKO\u011eLU, HERAKLE\u0130TOS VE PARMEN\u0130DES AT\u00d6LYES\u0130 28. SEM\u0130NER \u00d6ZET\u0130"},"content":{"rendered":"

O\u011eUZ HA\u015eLAKO\u011eLU, HERAKLE\u0130TOS VE PARMEN\u0130DES AT\u00d6LYES\u0130 28. SEM\u0130NER \u00d6ZET\u0130<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

Seminerin Amac\u0131<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

Yirmi sekizinci seminer, O\u011fuz Ha\u015flako\u011flu\u2019nun Herakleitos ve Parmenides At\u00f6lyesi<\/em> dizisinde d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcncenin kendi \u00fczerine kapanan ve ayn\u0131 anda kendi kendini a\u015fan hareketini anlamaya y\u00f6neliktir. Bu derste Ha\u015flako\u011flu, Hegel\u2019in \u201c\u00e7izgi\u2013daire\u201d metaforundan yola \u00e7\u0131karak felsefi ilerlemenin do\u011fas\u0131n\u0131 inceler. Ama\u00e7, d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcncenin \u201cdo\u011frudanl\u0131k\u201d (dolays\u0131zl\u0131k) ile \u201carac\u0131l\u0131k\u201d (dolayl\u0131l\u0131k) aras\u0131ndaki ge\u00e7i\u015fini, yani soyutun somuta d\u00f6n\u00fc\u015f\u00fcm\u00fcn\u00fc anlamakt\u0131r. Seminer boyunca Hegel, Kant, Aristoteles, Platon ve Herakleitos aras\u0131nda felsefi bir diyalog kurulur; varl\u0131k, yokluk ve olu\u015f kavramlar\u0131 i\u00e7 i\u00e7e ge\u00e7irilir.<\/span><\/p>\n

Ana Temalar<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

    \n
  1. \u00c7izgi ve Daire: Bilimin D\u00f6n\u00fc\u015fen \u00c7izgisi<\/strong><\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    Ha\u015flako\u011flu semineri, Hegel\u2019in \u015fu c\u00fcmlesiyle ba\u015flat\u0131r: \u201cBilimsel ilerlemenin \u00e7izgisi kendini bir daire yapar.\u201d Bu ifade, do\u011frusal ilerlemenin sonunda kendi ba\u015flang\u0131c\u0131na d\u00f6nmesini, yani bilginin kendi kayna\u011f\u0131n\u0131 yeniden kurmas\u0131n\u0131 temsil eder. \u00c7izgi dolays\u0131zl\u0131\u011f\u0131, daire ise dolayl\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve b\u00fct\u00fcnl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc simgeler. B\u00f6ylece, bilgi yaln\u0131zca ilerleyen bir s\u00fcre\u00e7 de\u011fil, ayn\u0131 zamanda kendi \u00fczerine kapanan bir harekettir \u2014 kendini d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnen d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnce.<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n

      \n
    1. Dolays\u0131z ve Dolayl\u0131: Duyusal ile D\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnselin Gerilimi<\/strong><\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

      Dolays\u0131z olan, Hegel\u2019de duyu deneyimidir; dolayl\u0131 olan ise akl\u0131n d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnsel i\u015flevidir. Ancak Hegel, bu iki alan\u0131n birbirini d\u00f6n\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcrd\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fc s\u00f6yler: D\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnce, duyu deneyimini \u201cAufeheben\u201d (kald\u0131rma, d\u00f6n\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcrme, y\u00fcceltme) yoluyla dolays\u0131zla\u015ft\u0131r\u0131r. B\u00f6ylece duyu deneyimi art\u0131k yaln\u0131zca bir alg\u0131 de\u011fil, d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcncenin i\u00e7inde yeniden do\u011fan bir anlam h\u00e2line gelir. Bu d\u00f6n\u00fc\u015f\u00fcm, d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcncenin bilime ge\u00e7i\u015f an\u0131d\u0131r \u2014 \u00e7\u00fcnk\u00fc bilim, \u201cdolayl\u0131 olan\u0131n dolays\u0131zla\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131\u201dd\u0131r.<\/span><\/p>\n

        \n
      1. Hegel ile Kant Aras\u0131ndaki Ayr\u0131m<\/strong><\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

        Ha\u015flako\u011flu, Hegel\u2019in Kant\u2019a y\u00f6nelik ele\u015ftirisini a\u00e7\u0131klarken \u201cDing-an-sich\u201d (\u015feyin kendisi) kavram\u0131n\u0131 merkez al\u0131r. Kant i\u00e7in \u201c\u015feyin kendisi\u201d bilginin s\u0131n\u0131r\u0131d\u0131r; Hegel i\u00e7inse d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcncenin \u00f6n\u00fcnde engel olamaz. Hegel, \u201cD\u00fc\u015f\u00fcncenin d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda hi\u00e7bir \u015fey olamaz\u201d derken, varl\u0131\u011f\u0131 akl\u0131n hareketine i\u00e7kin hale getirir. Bu noktada Ha\u015flako\u011flu \u015fu soruyu y\u00f6neltir: \u201cHegel\u2019in d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnemeyece\u011fi bir \u015fey olabilir mi?\u201d Bu retorik soruyla, Hegel\u2019in mutlak d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnce sistemini vurgular.<\/span><\/p>\n

          \n
        1. Aristoteles Ba\u011flant\u0131s\u0131: H\u00fcle\u2013Morphe ve Energeia<\/strong><\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

          Ha\u015flako\u011flu, Aristoteles\u2019in h\u00fcle\u2013morfizm<\/em> (madde\u2013bi\u00e7im) \u00f6\u011fretisi \u00fczerinden Hegel\u2019in sistemini a\u00e7\u0131klar. H\u00fcle (madde) ve morphe (bi\u00e7im) birbirinden ayr\u0131lamaz; bu, t\u0131pk\u0131 Hegel\u2019in dolays\u0131z ve dolayl\u0131s\u0131 gibi i\u00e7 i\u00e7e bir ili\u015fkidir. Aristoteles\u2019in \u201cenergeia\u201d kavram\u0131 \u2014 bir \u015feyin varl\u0131kta tutulma etkinli\u011fi \u2014 Hegel\u2019de \u201cAufeheben\u201d olarak yank\u0131lan\u0131r. Her ikisinde de \u201colu\u015f\u201d, dura\u011fan bir varl\u0131k durumundan ziyade, kendi i\u00e7inde dinamik bir hareket olarak anla\u015f\u0131l\u0131r.<\/span><\/p>\n

            \n
          1. Platon ile Ayr\u0131\u015fma: Meon, Kora ve A\u00e7\u0131kl\u0131k<\/strong><\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

            Platon\u2019da varl\u0131k, yoklukla de\u011fil, meon<\/em> (var olmayan) ile ili\u015fkilidir. Ha\u015flako\u011flu, Platon\u2019un kora<\/em> kavram\u0131n\u0131 \u201ca\u00e7\u0131kl\u0131\u011f\u0131n zemini\u201d olarak yorumlar. Kora, varl\u0131k ile yokluk aras\u0131nda bir alan de\u011fil, bunlar\u0131n sahneye \u00e7\u0131kt\u0131\u011f\u0131 mek\u00e2nd\u0131r. Bu anlamda Platon\u2019un evreni a\u00e7\u0131k bir evrendir \u2014 t\u0131pk\u0131 Herakleitos\u2019un evreni gibi. Hegel ise bu a\u00e7\u0131kl\u0131\u011f\u0131 kapatarak \u201cvarl\u0131k\u2013yokluk birli\u011fini\u201d mutlak bir sistem i\u00e7inde sabitler.<\/span><\/p>\n

              \n
            1. Varl\u0131k\u2013Yokluk\u2013Olu\u015f \u00dc\u00e7l\u00fcs\u00fc<\/strong><\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

              Seminerin merkezinde Hegel\u2019in \u015fu \u00f6nermesi yer al\u0131r: \u201cVarl\u0131k ve yokluk birli\u011fidir ba\u015flang\u0131\u00e7.\u201d Bu ifade, Parmenides\u2019in \u201cvar olan vard\u0131r, var olmayan yoktur\u201d ilkesini a\u015far.Hegel burada Parmenides\u2019in kavramlar\u0131n\u0131 al\u0131r, fakat onlar\u0131 Herakleitos\u2019un \u201ckar\u015f\u0131tlar\u0131n birli\u011fi\u201d anlay\u0131\u015f\u0131na tabi k\u0131lar. B\u00f6ylece varl\u0131k ve yokluk<\/em>, birbirine z\u0131t de\u011fil, birbirini zorunlu olarak i\u00e7eren kavramlar h\u00e2line gelir. Ha\u015flako\u011flu bunu \u015f\u00f6yle a\u00e7\u0131klar: \u201cHegel, Parmenides\u2019in kavramlar\u0131n\u0131 Herakleitos\u2019un diyalekti\u011fine tabi tutmu\u015ftur.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

                \n
              1. Aufehebung: Terki ile Terfi<\/strong><\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                Seminerde en \u00e7ok durulan kavram \u201cAufeheben\u201ddir. Ha\u015flako\u011flu bu terimi \u201cterk etmekle y\u00fcceltmek\u201d olarak \u00e7evirir: Bir \u015fey hem ortadan kalkar hem de daha y\u00fcksek bir d\u00fczeyde korunur. Bu, varl\u0131k ile yoklu\u011fun \u00e7eli\u015fkiden de\u011fil, birlikten<\/em> do\u011fmas\u0131n\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131klar. Hegel\u2019de \u201cAufeheben\u201d hem ayr\u0131m\u0131 hem \u00f6zde\u015fli\u011fi m\u00fcmk\u00fcn k\u0131lar \u2014 d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnmenin motoru<\/em> budur.<\/span><\/p>\n

                  \n
                1. Spek\u00fclatif D\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnme<\/strong><\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                  Ha\u015flako\u011flu, Hegel\u2019in d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnme tarz\u0131n\u0131 \u201cspek\u00fclatif d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnme\u201d olarak tan\u0131mlar. Spek\u00fclatif d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnme, d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcncenin kendi hareketini \u201cseyretmesidir\u201d. Bu d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnme bi\u00e7imi, kavramlar\u0131 sabitlemez; onlar\u0131 i\u00e7 i\u00e7e ge\u00e7i\u015f i\u00e7inde g\u00f6r\u00fcr. Ha\u015flako\u011flu \u015f\u00f6yle der: \u201cHegel d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnmez, d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcncesini seyreder.\u201d Bu, felsefenin teoriden prati\u011fe, soyuttan canl\u0131 olana d\u00f6n\u00fc\u015f\u00fcm\u00fcd\u00fcr.<\/span><\/p>\n

                    \n
                  1. Ba\u015flang\u0131\u00e7 Olarak \u00d6zde\u015flik ve \u00d6zde\u015f Olmayan\u0131n \u00d6zde\u015fli\u011fi<\/strong><\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                    Hegel\u2019e g\u00f6re bilim, \u201c\u00f6zde\u015fli\u011fin ve \u00f6zde\u015f olmay\u0131\u015f\u0131n \u00f6zde\u015fli\u011fi\u201dnden ba\u015flar. Bu paradoksal form\u00fcl, felsefenin kendi i\u00e7 diyalekti\u011fini \u00f6zetler. Ha\u015flako\u011flu bunu \u201ck\u00f6k h\u00fccre\u201d benzetmesiyle a\u00e7\u0131klar: H\u00fccre, kendi i\u00e7inde hem bir hem iki olma potansiyelini ta\u015f\u0131r; t\u0131pk\u0131 d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcncenin de hem varl\u0131\u011f\u0131 hem yoklu\u011fu ayn\u0131 anda ta\u015f\u0131mas\u0131 gibi.<\/span><\/p>\n

                      \n
                    1. Platon\u2019un Sofist Diyalo\u011fu ve Logos\u2019un \u00c7atallanmas\u0131<\/strong><\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                      Ha\u015flako\u011flu, Hegel\u2019in \u00f6zde\u015flik\u2013ayr\u0131l\u0131k kavram\u0131n\u0131 Platon\u2019un Sofist<\/em> diyalo\u011fundaki \u201cTauton\u201d (ayn\u0131) ve \u201cHeteron\u201d (ba\u015fka) kavramlar\u0131yla ili\u015fkilendirir. Platon i\u00e7in logos, hem kinesis<\/em> (hareket) hem stasis<\/em> (dura\u011fanl\u0131k) i\u00e7erir. Hegel\u2019in \u201cvarl\u0131k\u2013yokluk\u2013olu\u015f\u201d \u00fc\u00e7lemesi, bu \u00e7atallanman\u0131n modern bi\u00e7imidir. Her iki d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fcr de, olu\u015fu varl\u0131kta tutan kuvveti \u201cd\u00fcnamis\u201d olarak g\u00f6r\u00fcr. Bu noktada Ha\u015flako\u011flu, Platon\u2019un kora<\/em>s\u0131n\u0131 \u201cd\u00fcnamisin mek\u00e2n\u0131\u201d olarak yorumlar: \u201cKora, hem babay\u0131 hem o\u011fulu kendinde toplayan, ayn\u0131 anda onlardan ayr\u0131lan a\u00e7\u0131kl\u0131kt\u0131r.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

                      Sonu\u00e7<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

                      Yirmi sekizinci seminer, d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnmenin en soyut d\u00fczeyinde bile \u201chareket\u201di, yani olu\u015fu<\/em> temellendirme \u00e7abas\u0131d\u0131r. Ha\u015flako\u011flu, Hegel\u2019in \u201cvarl\u0131k ve yoklu\u011fun birli\u011fi\u201d kavram\u0131n\u0131, Herakleitos\u2019un logosu ile Parmenides\u2019in ontolojisi aras\u0131nda kurar. Bu birlik, ne yaln\u0131zca varl\u0131kt\u0131r ne de yokluk \u2014 ikisinin kesi\u015fimidir. Felsefe burada \u201cvarl\u0131\u011f\u0131n sahneye koyulu\u015fu\u201d haline gelir: D\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnmek, varl\u0131\u011f\u0131 seyretmektir. \u201cBilimin \u00e7izgisi daireye d\u00f6n\u00fc\u015f\u00fcr \u2014 \u00e7\u00fcnk\u00fc d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnce, ba\u015flad\u0131\u011f\u0131 yere d\u00f6n\u00fc\u015ferek kendini bulur.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

                       <\/p>\n

                      Purpose of the Seminar<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

                      The twenty-eighth seminar explores how thought closes upon itself while simultaneously transcending its own boundaries. Ha\u015flako\u011flu interprets Hegel\u2019s metaphor of the line and circle<\/em> as a reflection of philosophical progress: knowledge advances not linearly but by returning to its own beginning. The goal is to understand the transition between immediacy<\/em> and mediation<\/em>, the transformation of the abstract into the concrete.<\/span><\/p>\n

                      Main Themes<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

                        \n
                      1. The Line and the Circle<\/strong><\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                        For Hegel, the line of scientific progress becomes a circle \u2014 thought returns to its origin, enriched by reflection. The line represents immediacy; the circle represents mediation and totality. Knowledge, therefore, is self-returning movement \u2014 thought thinking itself.<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n

                          \n
                        1. Immediacy and Mediation<\/strong><\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                          Immediacy corresponds to sensory experience; mediation to intellectual reflection. Through Aufehebung<\/em> (sublation), thinking transforms the immediate into something intelligible. This dialectical motion is the birth of science \u2014 the transformation of perception into understanding.<\/span><\/p>\n

                            \n
                          1. Hegel versus Kant<\/strong><\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                            Kant\u2019s \u201cthing-in-itself\u201d sets a limit to knowledge; Hegel rejects this boundary, insisting that nothing can lie outside thought. To think, for Hegel, is to make being itself intelligible \u2014 there is nothing beyond thought.<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n

                              \n
                            1. Aristotle\u2019s Influence<\/strong><\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                              Aristotle\u2019s hyle\u2013morphe<\/em> and energeia<\/em> doctrines illuminate Hegel\u2019s dialectic. Form and matter, like immediacy and mediation, cannot exist apart. Being is sustained through activity \u2014 the energy that keeps existence alive.<\/span><\/p>\n

                                \n
                              1. Plato\u2019s Meon and Kora<\/strong><\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                Plato\u2019s meon<\/em> (non-being) and kora<\/em> (space) are reinterpreted as openness \u2014 a stage on which being appears. Unlike Hegel\u2019s closed dialectic, Plato\u2019s cosmos remains open, receptive, and luminous.<\/span><\/p>\n

                                  \n
                                1. Being\u2013Nothing\u2013Becoming<\/strong><\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                  Hegel\u2019s central thesis \u2014 Being and Nothing are one<\/em> \u2014 combines Parmenidean ontology with Heraclitean dynamism. Being and Nothing are not opposites but moments within the same process: their unity gives rise to becoming.<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n

                                    \n
                                  1. Aufehebung<\/strong><\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                    Aufeheben<\/em> means both \u201cto cancel\u201d and \u201cto preserve.\u201d It is the movement through which difference becomes unity without losing tension. It is the pulse of speculative thought \u2014 the power that turns contradiction into growth.<\/span><\/p>\n

                                      \n
                                    1. Speculative Thinking<\/strong><\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                      Speculative thinking is not reasoning but seeing with thought<\/em>. Hegel does not analyze; he contemplates the movement of concepts. To think speculatively is to watch thought unfold within itself.<\/span><\/p>\n

                                        \n
                                      1. Identity and Non-Identity<\/strong><\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                        Science begins, says Hegel, with \u201cthe identity of identity and non-identity.\u201d Ha\u015flako\u011flu compares this to the cell that divides yet remains itself \u2014 a metaphor for the self-generating structure of being.<\/span><\/p>\n

                                          \n
                                        1. Plato\u2019s Sophist and the Division of Logos<\/strong><\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                          Plato\u2019s \u201cTauton\u201d (the same) and \u201cHeteron\u201d (the other) parallel Hegel\u2019s dialectic of being and non-being. Both thinkers aim to explain how unity arises through difference. For Ha\u015flako\u011flu, kora<\/em> is the field where this interplay becomes visible \u2014 \u201cthe luminous space of becoming.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

                                          Conclusion<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

                                          The twenty-eighth seminar culminates in a vision of philosophy as ontological theater<\/em>. Hegel\u2019s dialectic is reinterpreted as a dramatic staging of being and nothing within the openness of thought. Ha\u015flako\u011flu shows that true thinking is not possession but witnessing: \u201cTo think is to let being appear.\u201d <\/strong>The line becomes a circle \u2014 and thought, having traversed its path, returns home to itself.<\/span><\/p>\n

                                           <\/p>\n

                                           <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

                                          O\u011eUZ HA\u015eLAKO\u011eLU, HERAKLE\u0130TOS VE PARMEN\u0130DES AT\u00d6LYES\u0130 28. SEM\u0130NER \u00d6ZET\u0130 Seminerin […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"parent":0,"menu_order":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"","meta":{"footnotes":""},"class_list":["post-7621","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry"],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/klasikdusunceokulu.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/7621","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/klasikdusunceokulu.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/klasikdusunceokulu.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/klasikdusunceokulu.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/klasikdusunceokulu.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=7621"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/klasikdusunceokulu.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/7621\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":7622,"href":"https:\/\/klasikdusunceokulu.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/7621\/revisions\/7622"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/klasikdusunceokulu.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=7621"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}