The Function of Sensations in the Process of Knowledge according to Heraclitus. Part Two: The Indirect Use of Sensations.
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.14195/1984-249X_13_7Keywords:
Heraclitus, Indirect sensation, Knowledge, EpistemologyAbstract
The second part of the article deals mainly with seeing and hearing in an attempt to define the different kinds of sensation indirectness as well as their advantages and disadvantages in the process of knowledge. The indirectness of seeing are two, one is positive the other is negative. First there is the dream in which the sleeper see things that would be related to his active life. Information acquired in this condition should be dismissed because they are nothing but illusion. On the other hand while awake seeing allows humans to use theory of mind. Thus they can see other animals having sensation and interpret their reaction to it. This kind of information should be considered in the process of knowledge. Hearing also has a positive and a negative indirectness. The negative one occurs when someone hears the discourse of others who think they have particular comprehensions of the world. This kind of information is useful only as a counter-example. Contrary to seeing hearing is positive in its metaphorical sense. Because every human has the capacity of reason he must hear it to interpret the sensory information. In the end it is presented a complete scheme of the sensory process according to Heraclitus.
Downloads
References
CLEMENTE; NOURRY, N. (1857) (Ed.) Clementis AlexandriniOpera Quae Exstant Omnia, Tomus Secundus, Paris, Petit-Montrouge.HERÓDOTO; GODLEY, A. D. (1961-66) (Trad.) Herodotus. Cambridge, Harvard University.KAHN, C. (2001) The Art and Thought of Heraclitus,Cambridge, University Press.KIRK, G.S; RAVEN, J. E. (1971) The Presocratics Philosophers.Cambridge, University Press.LONG, A. (2006) (Ed.) The Cambridge Companion to Presocratic Philosophy.Cambridge, University Press.MARCOVICH, M. (2001) Heraclitus:Greek Text wiht a Short Commentary, Sankt Augustin, Academia.PRADEAU, J-F.(2002) Héraclite, citations et témoignages. Paris, GF Flammarion.SCHOFIELD, M; NUSSBAUM, M. (1982) (Eds.) Language and Logos, Cambridge, University Press.STOKES, M. (1971) One and Many in Presocratic Philosophy, Cambridge, University Press.VIEIRA, C.(2010) Um modelo para mudança em Heráclito, CODEX, vol.2, n.2
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Celso Oliveira Vieira
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Given the public access policy of the journal, the use of the published texts is free, with the obligation of recognizing the original authorship and the first publication in this journal. The authors of the published contributions are entirely and exclusively responsible for their contents.
1. The authors authorize the publication of the article in this journal.
2. The authors guarantee that the contribution is original, and take full responsibility for its content in case of impugnation by third parties.
3. The authors guarantee that the contribution is not under evaluation in another journal.
4. The authors keep the copyright and convey to the journal the right of first publication, the work being licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License-BY.
5. The authors are allowed and stimulated to publicize and distribute their work on-line after the publication in the journal.
6. The authors of the approved works authorize the journal to distribute their content, after publication, for reproduction in content indexes, virtual libraries and similars.
7. The editors reserve the right to make adjustments to the text and to adequate the article to the editorial rules of the journal.
