{"id":8198,"date":"2025-11-30T16:03:53","date_gmt":"2025-11-30T13:03:53","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/klasikdusunceokulu.com\/?page_id=8198"},"modified":"2025-11-30T16:03:53","modified_gmt":"2025-11-30T13:03:53","slug":"ayhan-citil-genel-felsefe-okumalari-4-seminer-ozeti","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/klasikdusunceokulu.com\/index.php\/ayhan-citil-genel-felsefe-okumalari-4-seminer-ozeti\/","title":{"rendered":"AYHAN \u00c7\u0130T\u0130L, GENEL FELSEFE OKUMALARI 4. SEM\u0130NER \u00d6ZET\u0130"},"content":{"rendered":"

AYHAN \u00c7\u0130T\u0130L, GENEL FELSEFE OKUMALARI 4. SEM\u0130NER \u00d6ZET\u0130<\/strong><\/p>\n

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

Bu dersin amac\u0131, felsefi bilgi anlay\u0131\u015f\u0131n\u0131n merkezinde yer alan do\u011fruluk kavram\u0131n\u0131 incelemek, do\u011frulu\u011fun ta\u015f\u0131y\u0131c\u0131s\u0131n\u0131n ne oldu\u011funu a\u00e7\u0131klamak ve klasik do\u011fruluk kuram\u0131n\u0131n kar\u015f\u0131la\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131 temel sorunlar\u0131 tart\u0131\u015fmakt\u0131r. Ders, epistemolojinin ba\u015flang\u0131\u00e7 noktas\u0131n\u0131 olu\u015fturacak bi\u00e7imde \u201cdo\u011fru\u2013yanl\u0131\u015f ayr\u0131m\u0131n\u0131n nas\u0131l m\u00fcmk\u00fcn oldu\u011fu\u201d sorusu etraf\u0131nda yap\u0131land\u0131r\u0131l\u0131r. Ayhan \u00c7itil, duyum, imge, kavram, h\u00fck\u00fcm ve \u00f6nerme aras\u0131ndaki ayr\u0131mlar\u0131 ortaya koyarak do\u011fruluk tart\u0131\u015fmas\u0131n\u0131n zeminini kurar.<\/p>\n

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

    \n
  1. Do\u011frulu\u011fun Ta\u015f\u0131y\u0131c\u0131s\u0131: \u00d6nerme<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    Dersin ilk k\u0131sm\u0131, do\u011frulu\u011fun do\u011frudan duyumlara veya imgere de\u011fil, yaln\u0131zca h\u00fck\u00fcm ve \u00f6nerme dedi\u011fimiz yap\u0131lara atfedilebilece\u011fini g\u00f6sterir. Duyumun kendisi do\u011fru ya da yanl\u0131\u015f de\u011fildir; k\u0131yaslama gerektirmez. Bir duyumun yanl\u0131\u015fl\u0131\u011f\u0131 ancak bir h\u00fck\u00fcm arac\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131yla ortaya \u00e7\u0131kar. \u0130mge de tekil bir tasavvurdur ve do\u011fru\u2013yanl\u0131\u015f niteli\u011fi ta\u015f\u0131maz. Kavram ise imgeden tamamen farkl\u0131 olup d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnsel bir birliktir. Bu nedenle do\u011frulu\u011fun ger\u00e7ek ta\u015f\u0131y\u0131c\u0131s\u0131, dildeki de\u011fi\u015fken unsurlardan soyutlanm\u0131\u015f olan \u201c\u00f6nermedir\u201d.<\/p>\n

      \n
    1. Laf\u0131z, C\u00fcmle ve \u00d6nerme Ayr\u0131m\u0131<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

      \u00c7itil, do\u011fruluk tart\u0131\u015fmas\u0131n\u0131n sa\u011fl\u0131kl\u0131 yap\u0131labilmesi i\u00e7in laf\u0131z\u2013c\u00fcmle\u2013\u00f6nermenin birbirine kar\u0131\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lmamas\u0131 gerekti\u011fini vurgular. Bir s\u00f6z\u00fcn belirli bir ki\u015fi taraf\u0131ndan belirli bir zamanda dile getirilmi\u015f h\u00e2li \u201claf\u0131z\u201dd\u0131r. Ayn\u0131 i\u00e7erik farkl\u0131 ki\u015filer taraf\u0131ndan farkl\u0131 zamanlarda ifade edilebilir. C\u00fcmle, lafz\u0131n soyutlanm\u0131\u015f h\u00e2lidir. \u00d6nerme ise gramer farkl\u0131l\u0131klar\u0131 da soyutlanarak geriye kalan mant\u0131ksal i\u00e7eriktir. Do\u011fru ya da yanl\u0131\u015f olan yaln\u0131zca bu \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc d\u00fczeydir.<\/p>\n

        \n
      1. Aristoteles\u2019in Do\u011fruluk Tan\u0131m\u0131 ve Uygunluk Kuram\u0131<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

        Klasik do\u011fruluk kuram\u0131, Aristoteles\u2019in \u201cvar olan\u0131 var, var olmayan\u0131 yok diye s\u00f6ylemek do\u011fru; var olan\u0131 yok, var olmayan\u0131 var diye s\u00f6ylemek yanl\u0131\u015f\u201d tan\u0131m\u0131na dayan\u0131r. Bu tan\u0131ma g\u00f6re do\u011fruluk, s\u00f6z ile vaka aras\u0131ndaki uygunluktur. \u0130lk bak\u0131\u015fta a\u00e7\u0131k ve ikna edici g\u00f6r\u00fcnen bu tan\u0131m, derinlemesine incelendi\u011finde ciddi felsefi sorunlarla kar\u015f\u0131la\u015f\u0131r.<\/p>\n

          \n
        1. Deneyimin \u00d6znelli\u011fi Problemi<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

          Dersin merkezinde yer alan ilk b\u00fcy\u00fck problem, deneyimin \u00f6znel olmas\u0131d\u0131r. Bir ki\u015finin kendi zihninde tecr\u00fcbe etti\u011fi \u015feyi ba\u015fkas\u0131 ayn\u0131 \u015fekilde tecr\u00fcbe edemez. Tersine \u00e7evrilmi\u015f renk tayf\u0131 \u00f6rne\u011fiyle \u00c7itil, herkesin renk alg\u0131s\u0131n\u0131n simetrik olarak yer de\u011fi\u015ftirmi\u015f olabilece\u011fini, buna ra\u011fmen kimsenin bunu fark edemeyece\u011fini g\u00f6sterir. Bu durum, uygunluk kuram\u0131n\u0131n varsayd\u0131\u011f\u0131 nesnel kar\u015f\u0131la\u015ft\u0131rman\u0131n imk\u00e2ns\u0131zl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ortaya \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131r.<\/p>\n

            \n
          1. Terimlerin Mu\u011flakl\u0131\u011f\u0131 Problemi<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

            \u0130kinci b\u00fcy\u00fck problem, dilde kullan\u0131lan genel terimlerin do\u011fal mu\u011flakl\u0131\u011f\u0131d\u0131r. \u201cBulutlu\u201d, \u201ck\u0131rm\u0131z\u0131\u201d, \u201ckap\u0131\u201d gibi terimlerin s\u0131n\u0131rlar\u0131 kesin de\u011fildir. Dil konu\u015furlar\u0131 d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda bunlar\u0131n anlam\u0131n\u0131 belirleyecek bir otorite yoktur. Bu nedenle bir \u00f6nermenin do\u011frulu\u011funu, bu terimlerin net s\u0131n\u0131rlar\u0131na g\u00f6re belirlemek \u00e7o\u011fu zaman m\u00fcmk\u00fcn de\u011fildir.<\/p>\n

              \n
            1. G\u00f6nderim Problemi: Quine\u2019\u0131n Gavagai \u00d6rne\u011fi<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

              \u00c7itil, g\u00f6nderim problemini Quine\u2019\u0131n \u00fcnl\u00fc \u201cGavagai\u201d \u00f6rne\u011fiyle a\u00e7\u0131klar. Bir yabanc\u0131 dili \u00f6\u011frenmeye \u00e7al\u0131\u015fan ki\u015finin, bir s\u00f6zc\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn tam olarak neye g\u00f6nderimde bulundu\u011funu belirlemesi m\u00fcmk\u00fcn de\u011fildir. Ayn\u0131 olguya i\u015faret eden farkl\u0131 anlam katmanlar\u0131 olabilir. Bu durum, anlam\u0131n nesnelli\u011fini sarsar ve uygunluk kuram\u0131n\u0131 yeniden zorlar.<\/p>\n

                \n
              1. Nesnellik\u2013\u00d6znelik Gerilimi ve Sofizm Tehlikesi<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                \u00d6znellik problemlerinin kabul edilmesi, t\u00fcm do\u011fruluk iddialar\u0131n\u0131n g\u00f6reli h\u00e2le gelmesine, bunun da sofizme ve g\u00fc\u00e7 ili\u015fkilerinin belirleyici oldu\u011fu bir d\u00fczene yol a\u00e7mas\u0131na neden olur. Bu nedenle \u00c7itil, nesnelli\u011fi tamamen terk etmenin d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnsel ve toplumsal a\u00e7\u0131dan y\u0131k\u0131c\u0131 sonu\u00e7lar do\u011furaca\u011f\u0131n\u0131 vurgular.<\/p>\n

                  \n
                1. Deneysel Do\u011frulaman\u0131n S\u0131n\u0131rlar\u0131<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                  Modern bilimde deneysel do\u011frulaman\u0131n da asl\u0131nda \u00f6nermeler a\u011f\u0131na dayanmas\u0131, uygunluk kuram\u0131n\u0131n bir ba\u015fka zay\u0131f noktas\u0131n\u0131 olu\u015fturur. Bir olguyu \u201cdo\u011frudan\u201d g\u00f6zlemledi\u011fimizi d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnd\u00fc\u011f\u00fcm\u00fcz her durumda bile, o g\u00f6zlemin kendisi \u00f6nermelerden t\u00fcremi\u015f bir yorumdur. Olguyla \u00f6nerme aras\u0131nda dolays\u0131z bir kar\u015f\u0131la\u015ft\u0131rma m\u00fcmk\u00fcn de\u011fildir.<\/p>\n

                    \n
                  1. Tutarl\u0131l\u0131k Kuram\u0131na Ge\u00e7i\u015f ve Eksik Belirlenim<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                    Bu sorunlar nedeniyle baz\u0131 filozoflar do\u011frulu\u011fu \u201cuygunluk\u201d de\u011fil \u201ctutarl\u0131l\u0131k\u201d olarak tan\u0131mlar. Ancak tutarl\u0131l\u0131k da tek ba\u015f\u0131na ger\u00e7ekli\u011fi garanti etmez. Ayn\u0131 olguyu a\u00e7\u0131klayan birden fazla tutarl\u0131 kuram olabilir; buna \u201ceksik belirlenim\u201d denir.<\/p>\n

                      \n
                    1. Bilimsel Devrimler, Anomaliler ve Cemaatin De\u011ferleri<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                      Bir kuram\u0131n do\u011frulu\u011funu belirleyen \u00e7o\u011fu zaman onun bilimi icra eden toplulu\u011fun de\u011ferleriyle uyumudur. Kuram\u0131n ba\u015far\u0131s\u0131, anomali \u00fcreten rakiplerine g\u00f6re daha i\u015flevsel olmas\u0131na dayan\u0131r. Bu, bilimin tam anlam\u0131yla nesnel olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 y\u00f6n\u00fcnde g\u00fc\u00e7l\u00fc bir sonu\u00e7 do\u011furur.<\/p>\n

                        \n
                      1. Yanl\u0131\u015flanabilirlik ve Popper<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                        \u00c7itil, Popper\u2019\u0131n yanl\u0131\u015flanabilirlik ilkesine dikkat \u00e7eker: bir kuram do\u011frulu\u011funu tam olarak ispat edemez, fakat yanl\u0131\u015flanmaya a\u00e7\u0131k oldu\u011fu s\u00fcrece bilimsel kabul edilir. Ancak yanl\u0131\u015flanabilirli\u011fin kendisi de mant\u0131ksal \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131mlara dayan\u0131r ve mant\u0131\u011f\u0131n rol\u00fcn\u00fc merkezile\u015ftirir.<\/p>\n

                          \n
                        1. Mant\u0131\u011f\u0131n Do\u011frulukta \u00dcstlendi\u011fi Rol<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                          Dersin sonunda \u00c7itil, i\u00e7eriksel do\u011fruluk tart\u0131\u015fmalar\u0131n\u0131n zorluklar\u0131n\u0131 a\u015fabilmek i\u00e7in mant\u0131\u011f\u0131n zorunlu bir temel olu\u015fturdu\u011funu vurgular. Mant\u0131k, i\u00e7erikten ba\u011f\u0131ms\u0131z olarak ge\u00e7erli \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131mlar \u00fcretmemizi sa\u011flar ve bilginin geni\u015fleyebilmesinin tek g\u00fcvenilir yoludur.<\/p>\n

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

                          Bu ders, klasik do\u011fruluk kuram\u0131n\u0131n kar\u015f\u0131la\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131 \u00e7ok katmanl\u0131 sorunlar\u0131 ele al\u0131r: deneyimin \u00f6znelli\u011fi, terimlerin mu\u011flakl\u0131\u011f\u0131, g\u00f6nderim belirsizli\u011fi, bilimsel kuramlar\u0131n eksik belirlenimi ve nesnelli\u011fin k\u0131r\u0131lganl\u0131\u011f\u0131. Ayhan \u00c7itil, t\u00fcm bu problemlerin bilgi aray\u0131\u015f\u0131n\u0131 imk\u00e2ns\u0131z h\u00e2le getirmedi\u011fini ancak do\u011fruluk kavram\u0131n\u0131n san\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan \u00e7ok daha karma\u015f\u0131k oldu\u011funu g\u00f6sterir. Bu nedenle do\u011frulu\u011fun i\u00e7eriksel zemininde ya\u015fanan g\u00fc\u00e7l\u00fckler kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131nda mant\u0131k, bilginin geni\u015flemesini sa\u011flayan temel ara\u00e7 olarak ortaya \u00e7\u0131kar.<\/p>\n

                           <\/p>\n

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

                          The purpose of this lesson is to examine the concept of truth, which lies at the center of philosophical theories of knowledge, to explain what the bearer of truth is, and to discuss the fundamental problems faced by the classical theory of truth. The lesson is structured around the question that forms the beginning of epistemology: \u201cHow is the distinction between true and false possible?\u201d Ayhan \u00c7itil establishes the ground of the discussion by distinguishing sensation, image, concept, judgment, and proposition.<\/p>\n

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

                            \n
                          1. The Bearer of Truth: Proposition<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                            The first part of the lesson shows that truth cannot be attributed to sensations or images, but only to judgments and propositions. Sensation itself is neither true nor false; it requires no comparison. The falsity of a sensation emerges only through a judgment. An image is a singular representation and does not carry truth value. A concept, however, is entirely different from an image and is an intellectual unity. For this reason, the real bearer of truth is the propositional structure abstracted from linguistic variations.<\/p>\n

                              \n
                            1. The Distinction Between Utterance, Sentence, and Proposition<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                              \u00c7itil emphasizes that the discussion of truth requires distinguishing utterance, sentence, and proposition. An utterance is the concrete act of speaking at a particular time and place. A sentence is the abstraction from this act. A proposition is what remains when grammatical differences are also abstracted. Only propositions can be true or false.<\/p>\n

                                \n
                              1. Aristotle\u2019s Definition of Truth and the Correspondence Theory<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                The classical theory of truth rests on Aristotle\u2019s definition: \u201cTo say of what is that it is, and of what is not that it is not, is true; to say of what is that it is not, or of what is not that it is, is false.\u201d Thus truth is the agreement between speech and reality. Although initially persuasive, this definition encounters deep philosophical difficulties.<\/p>\n

                                  \n
                                1. The Problem of the Subjectivity of Experience<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                  The first major problem is the subjectivity of experience. What a person experiences in their own mind cannot be accessed by another. Using the inverted spectrum example, \u00c7itil shows that individuals may have entirely different color perceptions without being able to detect this difference. This undermines the assumption of the correspondence theory that comparison with an objective reality is possible.<\/p>\n

                                    \n
                                  1. The Problem of the Vagueness of Terms<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                    The second major problem is the natural vagueness of general terms in language. Words like \u201ccloudy,\u201d \u201cred,\u201d or \u201cdoor\u201d do not have precise boundaries. There is no authority outside speakers of the language to fix these meanings. This makes it impossible to determine truth-value based on clearly defined terms.<\/p>\n

                                      \n
                                    1. The Problem of Reference: Quine\u2019s Gavagai Example<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                      \u00c7itil explains the problem of reference with Quine\u2019s famous \u201cGavagai\u201d example. A person learning a foreign language cannot determine exactly what a word refers to. The same phenomenon may correspond to multiple layers of meaning. This weakens the objectivity of meaning and challenges the correspondence theory.<\/p>\n

                                        \n
                                      1. The Tension Between Objectivity and Subjectivity and the Threat of Sophistry<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                        The acceptance of subjectivity leads to the relativization of all claims to truth, which results in sophistry and the dominance of power relations. Therefore \u00c7itil stresses that abandoning objectivity has destructive intellectual and social consequences.<\/p>\n

                                          \n
                                        1. The Limits of Empirical Verification<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                          Even empirical verification in modern science depends on networks of propositions. What we think is a direct observation is itself an interpretation derived from propositions. There is no direct comparison between a proposition and a \u201cgiven\u201d fact.<\/p>\n

                                            \n
                                          1. Transition to the Coherence Theory and Underdetermination<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                            Because of these problems, some philosophers define truth as coherence rather than correspondence. But coherence alone does not guarantee reality. More than one coherent theory may explain the same phenomenon; this is the problem of underdetermination.<\/p>\n

                                              \n
                                            1. Scientific Revolutions, Anomalies, and the Values of the Scientific Community<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                              The acceptance of a theory often depends on how well it fits the values of the scientific community. A theory\u2019s success depends on its functional superiority relative to its competitors. This shows that science is not fully objective.<\/p>\n

                                                \n
                                              1. Falsifiability and Popper<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                                \u00c7itil draws attention to Popper\u2019s principle of falsifiability. A theory cannot fully prove its truth, but it is scientific insofar as it is open to falsification. This principle highlights the central role of logical inference.<\/p>\n

                                                  \n
                                                1. The Role of Logic in Truth<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                                  \u00c7itil concludes that logic is indispensable because it allows knowledge to expand despite the difficulties of content-based truth. Logic makes valid inference possible independently of content and thus provides the only reliable ground for the growth of knowledge.<\/p>\n

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

                                                  This lesson addresses the multi-layered problems encountered by the classical theory of truth: the subjectivity of experience, the vagueness of terms, the indeterminacy of reference, the underdetermination of scientific theories, and the fragility of objectivity. Ayhan \u00c7itil shows that these problems do not make knowledge impossible, but they reveal that truth is far more complex than commonly assumed. For this reason, logic becomes the foundation that enables the expansion of knowledge.<\/p>\n

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

                                                  AYHAN \u00c7\u0130T\u0130L, GENEL FELSEFE OKUMALARI 4. SEM\u0130NER \u00d6ZET\u0130 Seminerin Amac\u0131 […]<\/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-8198","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry"],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/klasikdusunceokulu.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/8198","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=8198"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/klasikdusunceokulu.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/8198\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":8199,"href":"https:\/\/klasikdusunceokulu.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/8198\/revisions\/8199"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/klasikdusunceokulu.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=8198"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}