{"id":7642,"date":"2025-11-16T21:59:15","date_gmt":"2025-11-16T18:59:15","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/klasikdusunceokulu.com\/?page_id=7642"},"modified":"2025-11-16T22:01:12","modified_gmt":"2025-11-16T19:01:12","slug":"oguz-haslakoglu-herakleitos-ve-parmenides-atolyesi-38-seminer-ozeti","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/klasikdusunceokulu.com\/index.php\/oguz-haslakoglu-herakleitos-ve-parmenides-atolyesi-38-seminer-ozeti\/","title":{"rendered":"O\u011eUZ HA\u015eLAKO\u011eLU, HERAKLE\u0130TOS VE PARMEN\u0130DES AT\u00d6LYES\u0130 38. SEM\u0130NER \u00d6ZET\u0130"},"content":{"rendered":"

O\u011eUZ HA\u015eLAKO\u011eLU, HERAKLE\u0130TOS VE PARMEN\u0130DES AT\u00d6LYES\u0130 38. SEM\u0130NER \u00d6ZET\u0130<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

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

Otuz sekizinci seminer, O\u011fuz Ha\u015flako\u011flu\u2019nun Herakleitos ve Parmenides At\u00f6lyesi<\/em> dizisinde Hegel\u2019in Mant\u0131k Bilimi<\/em> \u00fczerinden Kant\u2019\u0131n \u201cy\u00fcz taler\u201d \u00f6rne\u011fini tart\u0131\u015fmaya a\u00e7ar. Seminerin amac\u0131, Kant\u2019\u0131n temsil anlay\u0131\u015f\u0131 ile Hegel\u2019in varl\u0131k ve kavram ili\u015fkisini kar\u015f\u0131la\u015ft\u0131rarak, olanak (M\u00f6glichkeit) ile edimsellik (Wirklichkeit) aras\u0131ndaki fark\u0131n felsefi anlam\u0131n\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131klamakt\u0131r. Ha\u015flako\u011flu, bu tart\u0131\u015fmay\u0131 Herakleitos\u2019un de\u011fi\u015fim fikriyle ve Parmenides\u2019in \u201colan vard\u0131r\u201d ilkesinin Hegelci d\u00f6n\u00fc\u015f\u00fcm\u00fcyle ili\u015fkilendirir.<\/span><\/p>\n

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

    \n
  1. Kant\u2019\u0131n \u201cY\u00fcz Taler\u201d \u00d6rne\u011fi<\/strong><\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    Kant, zihindeki y\u00fcz taler ile ger\u00e7ek d\u00fcnyadaki y\u00fcz taler aras\u0131nda fark oldu\u011funu s\u00f6yler. Birincisi yaln\u0131zca bir kavram, ikincisi ise alg\u0131d\u0131r. Zihnimde y\u00fcz taler d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnmem, cebimde y\u00fcz talerim oldu\u011fu anlam\u0131na gelmez. Ha\u015flako\u011flu bu \u00f6rne\u011fi, d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnce ile varl\u0131k aras\u0131ndaki mesafeyi g\u00f6stermek i\u00e7in hat\u0131rlat\u0131r. Kavram, varl\u0131\u011fa eklenemez; yaln\u0131zca onun temsilidir.<\/span><\/p>\n

      \n
    1. Hegel\u2019in Yan\u0131t\u0131: Ayr\u0131m\u0131n A\u015f\u0131lmas\u0131<\/strong><\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

      Hegel bu ayr\u0131m\u0131 kabul etmez. Ona g\u00f6re kavram ile varl\u0131k aras\u0131nda mutlak bir kopukluk yoktur. Varl\u0131k, kavram\u0131n kendini ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirme bi\u00e7imidir. Ha\u015flako\u011flu, Hegel\u2019in bu noktada Kant\u2019\u0131 \u201cd\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnceyi \u00e7oktan b\u00f6ld\u00fc\u011f\u00fc\u201d i\u00e7in ele\u015ftirdi\u011fini belirtir. Kant i\u00e7in bilgi, nesneye ula\u015fmaz; Hegel i\u00e7in ise d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnce zaten varl\u0131\u011f\u0131n kendisidir.<\/span><\/p>\n

        \n
      1. Varl\u0131k\u2013Yokluk\u2013Olu\u015f Diyalekti\u011fi<\/strong><\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

        Ha\u015flako\u011flu, Hegel\u2019in Mant\u0131k Bilimi<\/em>\u2019ndeki ilk \u00fc\u00e7l\u00fc yap\u0131ya d\u00f6ner: varl\u0131k, yokluk, olu\u015f. Bu \u00fc\u00e7l\u00fc, d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcncenin ve varl\u0131\u011f\u0131n ilk hareketini olu\u015fturur. Varl\u0131k ve yokluk, birbirine ge\u00e7erek olu\u015fu do\u011furur. Ha\u015flako\u011flu bu yap\u0131y\u0131 \u201cd\u00fc\u015f\u00fcncenin kendi s\u0131n\u0131r\u0131n\u0131 a\u015fmas\u0131\u201d olarak yorumlar. Varl\u0131k, kendi yoklu\u011fu i\u00e7inde kendini bulur; yokluk da varl\u0131\u011fa d\u00f6n\u00fc\u015f\u00fcr.<\/span><\/p>\n

          \n
        1. S\u0131n\u0131r Metaforu<\/strong><\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

          Ha\u015flako\u011flu, bu ili\u015fkiyi somutla\u015ft\u0131rmak i\u00e7in bir s\u0131n\u0131r \u00f6rne\u011fi verir. Bir s\u0131n\u0131r hem iki taraf\u0131 ay\u0131r\u0131r hem de birle\u015ftirir. Bu nedenle s\u0131n\u0131r, hem var hem yoktur \u2014 iki taraf\u0131n kesi\u015fimidir. T\u0131pk\u0131 Hegel\u2019in olu\u015f kavram\u0131 gibi, s\u0131n\u0131r da hem \u201cne\u201d hem \u201chem\u201ddir. Bu, Hegelci diyalekti\u011fin \u00f6z\u00fcd\u00fcr: kar\u015f\u0131tlar\u0131n birli\u011fi.<\/span><\/p>\n

            \n
          1. Olanak ve Edimsellik<\/strong><\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

            Kant\u2019ta olanak, ger\u00e7eklikten ayr\u0131 bir kategoridir; Hegel\u2019de ise olanak zaten edimselli\u011fin bir y\u00f6n\u00fcd\u00fcr. Bir \u015feyin ger\u00e7ekten m\u00fcmk\u00fcn olmas\u0131, onun i\u00e7inde zaten bir edimsellik ta\u015f\u0131mas\u0131 demektir. Ha\u015flako\u011flu, Hegel\u2019in bu d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcncesini \u201cvarl\u0131\u011f\u0131n kendi olana\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirmesi\u201d olarak a\u00e7\u0131klar. Bu s\u00fcre\u00e7, d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcncenin kendini d\u0131\u015fsalla\u015ft\u0131rmas\u0131d\u0131r.<\/span><\/p>\n

              \n
            1. Tanr\u0131 Kavram\u0131 ve Ontolojik Kan\u0131t<\/strong><\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

              Seminerin son b\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fcnde Ha\u015flako\u011flu, Kant\u2019\u0131n Tanr\u0131\u2019n\u0131n varl\u0131\u011f\u0131 kan\u0131t\u0131<\/em> ele\u015ftirisine de\u011finir. Kant\u2019a g\u00f6re Tanr\u0131\u2019n\u0131n kavram\u0131ndan varl\u0131k \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lamaz; Hegel ise Tanr\u0131 kavram\u0131n\u0131n kendisini varl\u0131k olarak yorumlar. Tanr\u0131\u2019n\u0131n d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fclmesi, zaten Tanr\u0131\u2019n\u0131n varolu\u015fudur. Bu noktada Hegel, d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnce ile varl\u0131k aras\u0131ndaki u\u00e7urumu tamamen kapat\u0131r.<\/span><\/p>\n

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

              Otuz sekizinci seminer, Kant\u2019\u0131n bilgi anlay\u0131\u015f\u0131n\u0131 Hegelci diyalektik \u0131\u015f\u0131\u011f\u0131nda yeniden de\u011ferlendirir. Ha\u015flako\u011flu, Hegel\u2019in felsefesinde d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnce ile varl\u0131\u011f\u0131n art\u0131k ayr\u0131lmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, aksine ayn\u0131 hareketin iki y\u00fcz\u00fc haline geldi\u011fini vurgular. Varl\u0131k, d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcncenin kendini ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirmesidir; d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnce, varl\u0131\u011f\u0131n kendini bilmesidir. \u201cZihnimdeki y\u00fcz talerle bankadaki y\u00fcz taler farkl\u0131d\u0131r \u2014 ama bu fark\u0131n kendisi, d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcncenin ger\u00e7ekli\u011fidir.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

               <\/p>\n

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

              The thirty-eighth seminar in O\u011fuz Ha\u015flako\u011flu\u2019s Heraclitus and Parmenides Workshop<\/em> explores Hegel\u2019s discussion of Kant\u2019s \u201chundred thaler\u201d example. Its aim is to analyze how Hegel reinterprets Kant\u2019s distinction between concept and being, possibility and actuality, and appearance and reality. Ha\u015flako\u011flu connects this to the ancient opposition between Parmenides\u2019 \u201cwhat is, is\u201d and Heraclitus\u2019 philosophy of becoming.<\/span><\/p>\n

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

                \n
              1. Kant\u2019s Example<\/strong><\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                Kant argues that a hundred thalers in the mind differ from a hundred thalers in the bank. The first is a concept, the second an intuition. Thinking of money does not make it real. This illustrates the epistemological gap between thought and existence.<\/span><\/p>\n

                  \n
                1. Hegel\u2019s Response<\/strong><\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                  Hegel denies such a strict division. For him, being and thought are not separate but identical in movement. Being is the realization of the concept. Ha\u015flako\u011flu notes that Hegel thus reunites what Kant had divided \u2014 knowledge and reality.<\/span><\/p>\n

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

                    The triad of being, nothing, and becoming is the first dialectical movement in Hegel\u2019s Science of Logic<\/em>. Being and nothing are not opposites but transitions that produce becoming. Being is found through its negation; nothing becomes being.<\/span><\/p>\n

                      \n
                    1. The Boundary Metaphor<\/strong><\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                      A boundary both separates and connects. It belongs to both sides and yet to neither. Thus it embodies Hegel\u2019s idea of becoming \u2014 the unity of opposites.<\/span><\/p>\n

                        \n
                      1. Possibility and Actuality<\/strong><\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                        For Kant, possibility and actuality are distinct; for Hegel, they interpenetrate. Something is possible only insofar as it carries actuality within itself. Being is the unfolding of its own possibility.<\/span><\/p>\n

                          \n
                        1. The Concept of God<\/strong><\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                          Kant rejected the ontological proof of God\u2019s existence. Hegel restores it by claiming that the concept of God already includes existence. To think God is for God to be \u2014 thought and being coincide.<\/span><\/p>\n

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

                          The thirty-eighth seminar presents Hegel\u2019s transformation of Kant\u2019s philosophy through the logic of being and thought. Ha\u015flako\u011flu highlights how Hegel dissolves the boundary between concept and existence. Being is no longer opposed to thought; it is thought\u2019s own fulfillment. \u201cThe hundred thalers in the mind and in the bank differ \u2014 yet their difference is the truth of thought itself.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

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

                          O\u011eUZ HA\u015eLAKO\u011eLU, HERAKLE\u0130TOS VE PARMEN\u0130DES AT\u00d6LYES\u0130 38. 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-7642","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry"],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/klasikdusunceokulu.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/7642","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=7642"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/klasikdusunceokulu.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/7642\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":7643,"href":"https:\/\/klasikdusunceokulu.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/7642\/revisions\/7643"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/klasikdusunceokulu.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=7642"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}