Rational Comprehension of Philosophical Reality: Worldview and Its Historical Forms

Abstract

This article explores the philosophical worldview and its historical forms as a unique means of understanding the world, rooted in the human mechanism of cognition. The rational comprehension of the world is deeply complex, much like the mechanism by which a person understands themselves. It is widely accepted that humans are historical beings shaped by historical processes. A modern example is how humanity’s relationship with nature now reflects a deeply developed level of understanding. Since ancient times, humans have attempted to understand the regularities governing all natural phenomena and processes. In this sense, rational comprehension is not merely the emergence of human intellectual power or essence, but a universally accepted reality throughout human history. The article discusses the existence of reality and its rational comprehension from the first perspective, rational understanding must be grounded in the interaction between all components of reality and from the second, the process is understood temporally—as containing the duration and continuity of existence—and is viewed as a dynamic development. The central philosophical task today is to analyze and resolve the new realities that human intervention introduces.

Keywords

• Worldview
• Rational Comprehension
• Human Cognition
• Religion
• Reality

Felsefi Gerçekliğin Akılcı Kavranışı: Dünya Görüşü ve Tarihsel Biçimleri

Öz

Bu makale, insanın bilişsel mekanizmasına dayanan, dünyayı anlamanın özgün bir yolu olarak felsefi dünya görüşünü ve onun tarihsel biçimlerini incelemektedir. Dünyanın akılcı kavranışı, tıpkı insanın kendisini anlama mekanizması gibi son derece karmaşıktır. İnsanların tarihsel süreçlerle şekillenen tarihsel varlıklar olduğu genel kabul görmektedir. Bunun modern bir örneği, insanlığın doğa ile ilişkilerinin artık derinlemesine gelişmiş bir anlayış düzeyini yansıtmasıdır. Antik çağlardan bu yana insanlar, tüm doğal olguları ve süreçleri yöneten düzenlilikleri anlamaya çalışmışlardır. Bu anlamda akılcı kavrayış, yalnızca insanın entelektüel gücünün veya özünün ortaya çıkışı değil, insanlık tarihi boyunca evrensel olarak kabul edilen bir gerçekliktir. Makalede, gerçekliğin varlığı ve onun akılcı kavranışı iki açıdan ele alınmaktadır: Birincisi, rasyonel anlayışın, gerçekliğin tüm bileşenleri arasındaki etkileşime dayandırılması gerektiğidir. İkincisi ise bu sürecin zamansal olarak—varoluşun sürekliliğini ve devamlılığını içeren—dinamik bir gelişim olarak anlaşılmasıdır. Günümüzde temel felsefi görev, insan müdahalesinin ortaya çıkardığı yeni gerçeklikleri analiz etmek ve çözümlemektir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Dünya görüşü
• Akılcı Kavrayış
• İnsan Bilişi
• Din
• Gerçeklik

Kaynakça

1. Adorno, T. W. (2018). Minima moralia: Reflections from damaged life (İ. Məmmədov, Trans.). Alatoran. (Original work published 1951).
2. Agustinus, A. (2015). On the free choice of the will (M. Topuz, Trans.). Say. (Original work published ca. 388).
3. Bahi, B. (2020). Rationality, science, and public discourse: Evaluating Feyerabend in modern context. Philosophy & Social Criticism, 46(3), 297–316. https://doi.org/10.1177/0191453719876543
4. Bohr, N. (2021). Communicative rationality and digital publics: A Habermasian perspective. Media, Culture & Society, 43(7), 1281–1298. https://doi.org/10.1177/01634437211021945
5. Delacampagne, C. (2010). History of philosophy in the 20th century (D. Çekinkasap, Trans.). Türkiye İş Bankası.
6. Feuerbach, L. (1881). The essence of Christianity (M. Evans, Trans.). Trübner and Co.
7. Feyerabend, P. (1978). Science in a free society. Verso.
8. Feyerabend, P. (1987). How to defend society against science (Ö. Madra, Trans.). Gergedan, 1(2), 85–96.

9. Feyerabend, P. (1989). Against method (A. İnam, Trans.). Ara.
10. Feyerabend, P. (2015). The tyranny of science (B. Yıldırım, Trans.). Sel.
11. Frobenius, L. (1932). Kulturgeschichte Afrikas: Prolegomena zu einer historischen Gestaltlehre. Quelle & Meyer.
12. Habermas, J. (1984). The theory of communicative action: Volume 1. Reason and the rationalization of society (T. McCarthy, Trans.). Beacon Press.
13. Habermas, J. (2019). The future of human nature (Z. Səttarlı, Trans.). Alatoran.
14. Harvey, D. (2019). Rebel cities: From the right to the city to the urban revolution (A. D. Temiz, Trans.). Metis.
15. Hegel, G. W. F. (1899). The philosophy of history (J. Sibree, Trans.). The Colonial Press.
16. Hegel, G. W. F. (1967). The phenomenology of mind (J. Baillie, Trans.). Macmillan.
17. Huizinga, J. (2018). Homo ludens: A study of the play-element in culture (O. Düz, Trans.). Alfa. Jameson, F., Lyotard, J.-F., & Habermas, J. (1994). Postmodernizm. Kıyı.
18. Jones, A. M. (2018). Homo ludens revisited: Play, performativity, and political subjectivation. Journal of Cultural Economy, 11(4), 316–331.
19. Kallinikos, J., Aaltonen, A., & Marton, A. (2013). The ambivalent information technology of the actor: Moral rationality and bureaucratic rationalization. Information and Organization, 23(3), 171–193. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infoandorg.2013.05.001
20. Kolodny, N., & Brunero, J. (2013, February 13). Instrumental rationality. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2013 Edition). https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/rationality-instrumental/
21. Latour, B. (2004). Politics of nature: How to bring the sciences into democracy. Harvard University Press.
22. Marx, K. (1890–1891). Critique of the Gotha Programme. Die Neue Zeit, 1(18), 13–30.
23. Marx, K. (1979). Grundrisse: Foundations of the critique of political economy (S. Nişanyan, Trans.). Birikim.
24. Meyer, C. O. (2015). Postmodern challenges to scientific truth: From relativism to pragmatic rationality. European Journal of Philosophy, 23(2), 280–298.
25. Najafov, R. (2025a). Esoteric knowledge and its varieties. Science, Education and Innovations in the Context of Modern Problems, 8(2), 26–48.
26. Najafov, R. (2025b). The problem of revelation in the philosophy of Eastern Peripatetism and its comparison with mind. Science, Education and Innovations in the Context of Modern Problems, 8(7), 448–452. https://doi.org/10.56352/sei/8.7.48
27. Najafov, R. N. (2025c). The problem of deviance as a social psychological factor in the social dynamics of society. Science, Education and Innovations in the Context of Modern Problems, 8(4), 21–29. https://doi.org/10.56352/sei/8.4.03
28. Qoriçeva, T. (1991). Orthodoxy and postmodernism. Leningrad University Press.
29. Sloterdijk, P. (1988). Critique of cynical reason (M. Eldred, Trans.). University of Minnesota Press.
30. Tarter, A. M. (2019). Breaking the monopoly of scientific reason: Feyerabend's epistemological pluralism in practice. Social Epistemology, 33(4), 342–360.
31. Taylor, C. (1991). The ethics of authenticity. Harvard University Press.
32. White, H. (2008). Metahistory: The historical imagination in nineteenth-century Europe (M. Küçük, Trans.). Dost.
33. Wiggershaus, R. (1994). The Frankfurt School: Its history, theories, and political significance (M. Robertson, Trans.). Polity Press.