http://kimmontaidearvioita.blogspot.com/p/it-is-not-easy-to-be-leader-in-anything.html
Kimmo Huosionmaa
It is not easy to be the leader in the anything in the world. Being at the top of the world means, that other persons would use the texts and other works of that person be the thing, what other people would use in their own works. The leading engineers must make every test process for the product, and that’s why everybody should pay them the price, when they use the product, what they are made. If something would get easier, that person must pay the price.
When we are thinking of the leading philosophers in the world, we must say, that it would not be easy to be that kind of person. The leading philosophers would not use other person texts in their work, and when we are thinking about people like Socrates, they would not go to make lectures for reading other people texts.
That makes their job quite difficult because other people would always make comments about their work. But nothing would be easy in the world, and if the person would not make own texts and introduce their own thoughts, they must use sources, and in those cases, we can ask many questions about those things. If somebody uses only other people thoughts, that would tell that this person would not have single own opinions for those things.
And in that case, we can say, that if somebody would not write and publish own ideas and thoughts on the Internet, we cannot be sure, how intelligent they really are? This text is made for everybody, who would tease other people about the writings, what this teased person have made on the Internet.
One of the principles of the western democracies is, that this is free land, and everybody has right to publish everything, what this person wants. And if the opponent would not make any publishes, would we say, that we cannot be sure, how clever those persons are, or do they have any interesting hobbies in their life. Those people are often delivered other persons diaries and other things on the Internet, but when they would say, that some other people are stupid, I would gladly see some evidence about their wisdom. In the real life the question about, who would believe who is the question, who would make the most confessing session over the jury.
This is the question in the philosophy, the person, who would allow other persons to see the texts, would confess the audience at least one thing, this person would have own opinions, and every people have right for introducing their texts to the audience. That is the thing, what is called the rhetorics. If somebody would say something in some rooms when the other person is alone with the speaker, can this another person claim, that the opponent would not be said those things. But if those texts would be published, that would be confessing by the unselected audience, what has an opportunity to make them own decisions about the writing, what somebody have been made.
Comments
Post a Comment