Free Will and Determinism

Yıl 2015, Cilt: 15 Sayı: 2, 137 - 158, 01.06.2015

Devrim Özkan

Öz

Abstract
Since the beginning of 20th century, how people understand and perceive external world has become a perennial concern of social sciences. The existence of a solitary reality apart from human stance was relinquished. By following this idea, it became a common discussion topic that ‘reality is the result of a convention among people’ in the modern conditions which people become builders of each reality. In parallel with this idea, the problems regarding how people perceive external world in philosophy and social sciences have become more significant. Therefore, the position, function and facility of the subject which perceive the other objects from different viewpoints became a more significant issue with the increasing interest in perception theories. To reach the reality, the transition from the problem of which methods people should follow to the problem of how people perceive reality based on their position is the outcome of various social and intellectual developments. Nominalism dominated Northern Europe and became determinative. Then, it expanded, first, to Europe and, then, to the world. In the discussions of ‘free will and determinism’ between, first, Luther and Erasmus, and then, between Descartes and Hobbes, there are two major components increasing the interest toward perception theories that they positioned the modern subject in the center of everything, and free will became widespread. In this sense, theological roots of perception theories which appeal particularly to social psychology and communication sciences should be scrutinized within the context of intellectual history. Thus, the interconnections between theological studies and social sciences can be revealed, and some certain science fields which make use of perception theory can become aware of the intellectual roots of the methods and techniques they have been using. Furthermore, perception theories are so effective on shaping several methods used in communication sciences that the theological origins of these perception theories should be analyzed because the analyses about how people perceive outer world have significant effects on the establishment of communication systems

Modern Algı Teorisinin Teolojik Kökenleri: Özgür İrade ve Determinizm Problemi

Öz

Özet
Yirminci yüzyılın başından itibaren, insanın dış dünyayı nasıl anladığı ve algıladığı sosyal bilimlerin başlıca meselelerinden biri olmuştur. Dış dünyada insandan bağımsız, kendi başına bir gerçekliğin var olduğundan giderek vazgeçilmesiyle birlikte, insanın gerçekliğin inşacısına dönüştüğü modernlik koşullarında, ‘gerçekliğin insanlar arasındaki uzlaşmanın bir sonucu olduğu’ giderek yaygın bir tartışma konusu haline gelmiştir. Buna paralel olarak, felsefe ve sosyal bilimler alanında, insanın dış dünyayı nasıl algıladığına yönelik problemler ile giderek daha fazla ilgilenilmeye başlanmıştır. Bu sayede, algı teorilerine ilginin giderek artmasıyla birlikte, nesneyi farklı açılardan algılayan öznenin konumu, işlevi ve etkinliğinin biçimi daha önemli bir mesele haline gelmiştir. insanın gerçekliğe ulaşmak için nasıl bir metot kullanması gerektiği probleminden, insanın gerçekliği kendi konumuna göre nasıl farklı tarzlarda algıladığı problemine geçişse, çeşitli sosyal ve düşünsel gelişmelerin bir sonucudur. Nominalizmin Kuzey Avrupa’da etkin ve belirleyici bir düşünce akımı haline gelerek, önce tüm Avrupa’ya, daha sonra ise tüm dünyaya yayılması, sürecin belirleyici faktörüdür. Önceleri Luther ile Erasmus daha sonra ise Descartes ile Hobbes arasında gerçekleşen ‘özgür irade ve determinizm problemi’ne dair tartışmalarda, modern öznenin her şeyin merkezinde konumlandırılmasıyla, ‘özgür iradeci’ yaklaşımın yaygınlık kazanması algı teorilerine yönelik ilginin artmasını sağlayan başlıca etkendir. Bu nedenle günümüzde, özellikle sosyal psikoloji ve iletişim bilimlerinde yaygın biçimde başvurulan algı teorilerinin teolojik kökenleri, düşünce tarihi çalışmaları çerçevesinde, dikkatle ele alınmalıdır. Bu sayede, teolojik çalışmalar ile sosyal bilimler arasındaki bağlar ortaya çıkarılarak, algı teorisinden faydalanan kimi bilim sahalarının, kullandıkları metotların düşünsel kökenlerine dair farkındalık elde etmeleri temin edilebilir. Ayrıca, özellikle, iletişim bilimlerinde kullanılan çeşitli metotlarının biçimlenmesinde etkili olan algı teorilerinin teolojik kökenlerinin incelenmesi zaruridir. Zira insanın dış dünyayı nasıl bir biçimde algıladığına dair incelemeler iletişim sistemlerinin inşasında etkili olmaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

özgür irade , algı teorisi , determinizm , aristotecilik , nominalizm

Kaynakça

• AQUINAS, Thomas. (2007) [1271-72], Commentary on Aristotle's Politics, translated by Richard J. Regan, Indianapolis & Cambridge: Hackett Publishing Company.
• ARSLAN, Ahmet. (2007), İlk Çağ Felsefe Tarihi 3: Aristoteles, İstanbul: İstanbul Bilgi Üniversitesi Yayınları.
• BASINGER, David. (1983), “Why Petition an Omnipotent, Omniscient, Wholly Good God?”, Religious Studies, Cilt. 19, No. 1, ss. 25-41.
• BAYRAM, A. Kemal. (2009), “Modernlik ve Sosyal Bilimler: Bilgi, İktidar, Etik ve Toplum”, Afyon Kocatepe Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, Cilt: XI, Sayı 1, ss. 1-26.
• BERGSON, Henri. (1944) [1907], Creative Evolution, translated by Arthur Mitchell, New York: The Modern Library.
• BERGSON, Henri. (1960) [1889], Time and Free Will: An Essay on the Immediate Data of Consciousness, translated by F. L Pogson, New York: Harper & Brothers.
• BOURKE, John. (1947), “Frederickthe Great as Music-Loverand Musician”, Music & Letters, Cilt. 28, No. 1, ss. 63-77.
• BURTT, E. A. (1925), The Metaphysical Foundations of Modern Science, New York: Harcourt, Brace & Company.
• DESCARTES, Rene. (1993) [1641], Meditations on First Philosophy, translated by Donald A. Cress, Indianapolis: Hackett Publications.
• ERASMUS, Desiderius & LUTHER, Martin. (1985) [1524-25], Discourse on Free Will, edited & translated by Ernst F. Winter, London: Continuum Publishing.
• FREEDMAN, Joseph. S. (1993), “Aristotle and the Content of Philosophy Instruction at Central European Schools and Universities during the Reformation Era (1500-1650)”, Proceedings of the American
• Philosophical Society, Cilt. 137, No. 2, ss. 213-253.
• GARLICK, Fiona. (1997), “Dancesto Evoke the King: The Majestic Genre Chez Louis XIV.”, Dance Research: The Journal of the Society for Dance Research, Cilt. 15, No. 2, Papers from the Dance to Honour Kings
• Conference, ss. 10-34.
• GILLESPIE, Michael Allen. (2008), The Theological Origins of Modernity, Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
• GLAT, Mark. (1981), “John Locke's Historical Sense”, The Review of Politics, Cilt. 43, No. 1, ss. 3-21.
• HABERMAS, Jürgen. (1984) [1981], Theory of Communicative Action Volume One: Reason and the Rationalization of Society, translated by Thomas A. McCarthy, Boston & Mass.: Beacon Press.
• HABERMAS, Jürgen. (1987) [1981], Theory of Communicative Action Volume Two: Live-world and System: A Critique of Functionalist Reason, translated by Thomas A. McCarthy, Boston & Mass.: Beacon Press.
• HEDLEY, Douglas. (1996), “Pantheism, Trinitarian Theism and the Idea of Unity: Reflections on the Christian Concept of God”, Religious Studies, Cilt. 32, No. 1, ss. 61-77.
• HOBBES, Thomas. (1991) [1651], Leviathan, edited by Richard Tuck, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• ISHERWOOD, Robert. M. (1969), “The Centralization of Music in the Reign ofLouis XIV.”, French Historical Studies, Cilt. 6, No. 2, ss. 156-171.
• JARROTT, C. A. L. (1970), “Erasmus' Biblical Humanism”, Studies in the Renaissance, Cilt. 17, ss. 119-152.
• JEFFREY, Pulver. (1912), “Music at the Court of Frederick the Great”, The Musical Times, Cilt. 53, No. 835, ss. 599-601.
• KENT, F. W. (2004), Lorenzo De’ Medici and The Art of Magnificence, Baltimore & London: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
• KÖHLER, Walther. (1903), “Emperor Frederick II., The Hohenstaufe”, The American Journal of Theology, Cilt. 7, No. 2, ss. 225-248.
• LOCKE, John. (1988) [1689], Two Treatises of Civil Government, Cambridge & New York: Cambridge University Press.
• NISBET, Robert. (1986), The Making of Modern Society, New York: New York University Press,
• MEANS, Richard. L. (1966), “Protestantism and Economic Institutions: Auxiliary Theories to Weber's Protestant Ethic”, Social Forces, Cilt. 44, No. 3, ss. 372-381.
• O'BRIEN, Louis. (1931), “The Huguenot Policy of Louis XIV and Pope Innocent XI.”, The Catholic Historical Review, Cilt. 17, No. 1, ss. 29-42.
• O'MALLEY, John. W. (1974), “Erasmus and Luther, Continuity and Discontinuity as Key to Their Conflict”, The Sixteenth Century Journal, Cilt. 5, No. 2, ss. 47-65.
• PANOFSKY, Erwin. (1969), “Erasmus and the Visual Arts”, Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes, Cilt. 32, ss. 200-227.
• PEGIS, Anton. C. (1948), “Some Recent Interpretations of Ockham”, Speculum, Cilt. 23, No. 3, ss. 452-463.
• PETRARCH, Francesco. (1974) [1347-67], Petrarch’s Bucolicum Carmen, translated by Thomas G. Bergin, New Haven: Yale University Press.
• PETRARCH, Francesco. (1976), Petrarch’s Lyric Poems: The Rimesparse and Other Lyrics, edited and translated by Robert M. Durling, Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
• PINKARD, Terry. (2002), German Philosophy 1760-1860: The Legacy of Idealism, Cambridge & New York: Cambridge University Press.
• RESNICK, David. (1984), “Locke and the Rejection of the Ancient Constitution”, Political Theory, Cilt. 12, No. 1, ss. 97-114.
• SANDMAN, Susan Goertzel. (1977), “The Wind Band at Louis XIV's Court”, Early Music, Cilt. 5, No. 1, ss. 27-37.
• SHAPERE, Dudley. (1963), “Descartes and Plato”, Journal of the History of Ideas, Cilt. 24, No. 4, ss. 572-576.
• STENT, Gunther. S. (2002), “Paradoxes of Free Will”, Transactions of the American Philosophical Society, New Series, Cilt. 92, No. 6, ss. i-iii, v- ix, xi-xii, 1-261, 263-273, 275-284.
• STEPHENS, G. Ross. (1974), “State Centralization and the Erosion of Local Autonomy”, The Journal of Politics, Cilt. 36, No. 1, ss. 44-76.
• STOCK, Brian. (1995), “Reading, Writing, and the Self: Petrarch and His Forerunners”, New Literary History, Cilt. 26, No. 4, ss. 717-730.
• SULLIVAN, Vickie. B. (2004), Machiavelli, Hobbes, and the Formation of a Liberal Republicanism in England, Cambridge & New York: Cambridge University Press.
• TOKTAŞ, Fatih. (2004), İslam Düşüncesinde Felsefe Eleştirileri, İstanbul: Klasik Yayınları.
• TURHAN, Kasım. (1996), Bir Ahlak Problemi Olarak Kelam ve Felsefe Açısından İnsan Fiilleri, İstanbul: Marmara Üniversitesi İlahiyat Fakültesi Vakfı Yayınları.
• WEBER, Max. (2008) [1908-20], Max Weber’s Complete Writings on Academic and Political Vocations, edited by John Dreijmanis; translation by Gordon C. Wells, NewYork: Algora Publishing.
• WHITE, Lynn. (1978), “Science and the Sense of Self: The Medieval Background of a Modern Confrontation”, Daedalus, Cilt. 107, No. 2, Limits ofScientific Inquiry, ss. 47-59.
• WHITEHEAD, Alfred North. (1927), Symbolism: Its Meaning and Effect (Barbour-Page Lectures, University of Virginia, 1927), New York: Fordham University Press.
• WHITEHEAD, Alfred North. (1929), Process and Reality: An Essay in Cosmology (Gifford Lectures Delivered in the University of Edinburgh During the Session 1927-1928), New York: Free Press.
• WILKINS, Ernest H. (1964), “On the Evolution of Petrarch's Letterto Posterity”, Speculum, Cilt. 39, No. 2, ss. 304-308.
• ZAK, Gur. (2010), Petrarch’s Humanism and the Care of the Self, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.