About the evaluation of Dr. Karl Popper against the Hegel’s dialectic

About the evaluation of Dr. Karl Popper against the Hegel’s dialectic


Sky with clouds in summer and early autumn

* This sentence is a republishing one that was written on July 28, 2013 (Japanese version).


A. Hegel’s dialectic in “Conjectures and Refutations” of Dr. Karl Popper


α. It is first, about miscellaneous thoughts.


  1. In Dr. Karl Popper, Hegel compares with Kant, his position occupies a bad one. It is the completely opposite evaluation more than it says that his position is bad. Kant is clearly stated, and it let people who read it consents. On the other hand, about the point at issue of Hegel, it is thought that a lucidity of Doctor as the critic will be ideological problem rather than it says that it is indistinctness.


  1. As this cause, next thing can be thought. Firstly, what Kant had done is the philosophy that puts self’s thinking as a basis when he attempts to recognize an object, and it is that Dr. Popper has been also inherited this position. Second, that of Hegel is the self-completing (self-accomplishing) philosophy. From Germany, Marx and Hitler had come out. Marx is a Hegel’s student, and as for Hitler, the concept of self-completing ‘The Absolute Being’ of Hegel might let capture him fanatically. Hitler was thought as an enemy of a liberal society.


  1. I am always thinking. Before the times of Hitler (1889-1945), there was Max Weber (1864-1920) of the philosopher. The philosopher such as the star which shined was alive in Europe. However, they could not prevent the emergence of Hitler. I often think why this had occurred. Hegel called Napoleon the spirit of world. Beethoven wrote the symphony No3. Against Hitler too, because people were manipulated by his words, his supporters might be unexpectedly many. And, it is said that he was excellent in making speeches, and he played music of Wagner (1813-1883) before his speech, and he made the atmosphere that invited the audience to enthusiasm. However, Nazis’s act, if it is still called politics in today, it is the politics that deny a human being and we must not permit the appearance of a person like Hitler at any time. That is the target of the battle that we must face with full power. Why would philosophers have been powerless against such situations?


  1. Dr. Popper (1902-1994), too, was while living. As for the book, “The Logic of Scientific Discovery” was written in 1934 and “The Open Society and its Enemies” was published in 1945. A reason that Dr. Popper has been lacked lucidity against Hegel, Hegel was a German philosopher, and it is thought that it may not be able to deny that there was tense thought that the Jewish people had been accommodated to the concentration camps. Many Jewish people were involved in the October Revolution in Russian. As its representative, we will be able to pick a person called Leon Trotsky. He had been assassinated in Mexico by assassinators of Stalin (1940). Also in those days, communism had been scattering illusions on philosophers.


  1. Dr. Popper is more favorable to Marx than Hegel. I’m thinking that the world of Marx is the world of the fiction. I write it later, but there is a description to accept that a person draws the world of the fiction, in a Doctor too, through Kant. If this is to draw the fiction world, like Marx, in our daily world, we must refuse it. The cause that a lot of people of the egg of the scientist having the high educational background participated in the acts of terrorism of Omu Shinrikyo may exist in the place like this reason. Again, it is obvious that the fictional world where is made such a religion by the fiction is unacceptable.


β.It is Hegel’s dialectic


  1. About the dialectic, please refer to an article on December 31, 2011 (Japanese version) ‘A. About the dialectic’ in “Law and Justice 6”.


  1. The Doctor mentions Hegel and was explained like next. ‘Dialectics is the theory that insists that something one, especially human’s thought, develop by a method that is characterized by what is called “dialectical three steps growth” saying ‘ These – Antithese – Synthese ‘. This explanation is an error. This is rather the one that the Doctor has been spoken about “the development of dialectics” that, in particular, was prescribed by Engels of the times of Marx.


  1. Philosophy of Hegel is the self-confirming philosophy. The self faces with the others, the other things, the other world, and establishes one self and goes. He called this way the dialectic that succeeds to the dialogue method of the ancient Greek philosophy. It is a method of Socrates and is the method of “Conjectures and Refutations” of Dr. Popper, too. In this way, the self understands own-self and the world and develops both congruently. This is the skeleton of the philosophy of Hegel.


The self: In the case of Hegel, it is also a spirit. The act of human being is the act of each human being’s sprit, we may (can) understand that self is sprit and nature. I’m doing so.


  1. However, Hegel says, “The absolute being is the spirit.” (Enzyklopädie, 384) Also he says “The absolute spirit”. (Ib. 385) A little difficult words line up but several words Hegel’s saying exist here. ” The objective state of sprit and the ideal state of sprit, that is, the unification with its concept, when it exists absolutely, and when it is with the state of unification that produce the self forever, and when the spirit is absolute truth state, this is the absolute spirit.” (Ib. 385) This is the arrival point of self-conclusion type philosophy of Hegel. I’m being a state that I cannot understand this “the absolute being ” and ” the absolute spirit “.


  1. Therefore I quote Hegel one more. “The spirit can endure negation of own individual immediateness, that is, infinite pain. In other words, the spirit support affirmatively oneself against this negativity and can be the same one for oneself. This possibility is the universality that one spirit shows that oneself seeks ‘the confronting (facing) – the self – the affirming’ “. (Ib. 382) When the self is the spirit, we know that this is the world in Japan that has been preached as an ultimate state of the realization of the Zen, and as mental attitude of every days of the excellent ‘samurai’, too. However, when the self is the nature, we know that an equation saying ‘the self = the natural = the absolute being’ is equal cannot establish. Therefore I decided to call this absolute being ‘the arrogance of thought’, ‘the disrespect of consideration’. And also, this method of recognizing of ‘the absolute being’ which Hegel used is denied, even if we say from the dialectic (dialogue method) which had been the beginning of his self-awareness. Did he know this? It is not able to know now. But it is interesting when we think that he had been noticing it. He left such a problem for us of the coming age. But let’s move forward without stopping.


  1. Hegel’s achievement is in the point to be the person who was conscious that he introduces labor to the philosophy. “An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations” of Adam Smith was published in 1776. It thinks that he was inspired by this. Hesiodos of ancient Greece had preached that it is diligent in “Works and Days”. The labor is talked in the Bible too. From ancient times, people have been understanding that the labor is the one which brings wealth to the people by obtaining its produce and product of useful fortune. Hegel had incorporated this labor which is the source producing wealth with works and as the source which produces the world, in the philosophical world.


  1. Since then the object that the philosophy treat becomes the world. Until then, the philosopher had ascertained his existence and the world, by his thinking. A typical example is enough to remember that Descartes said: ‘Je pense, donc je suis’ (= ‘I think, so I am’). In the same way, the artist inspires one’s personality to one’s work. Politician aims to make a society which people are able to have worth which live in life. A scholar makes one’s academic achievement and effective policy proposal the evidence of one’s existence. By the same way as this, a decoration craftsman of the Japanese Edo era makes the workmanship of his ornamental ‘kanzasi’ the evidence of his existence, and a modern reinforcing steel rod worker is able to see the proof of his work in building that completed. It is Hegel that made this world possible. We must not forget this point which is his achievement, even if how he may be disparaged.


γ. Dr. Popper’s method


  1. Dr. Popper was inherited the method of Kant. The Doctor is described, ‘The intelligence does not derive the law from nature but imposes the law to nature.’ (“Conjectures and Refutations”, ‘Copernicus-like Turn of Kant’) And, about this, Doctor is described that this is a formulation by Kant. This description is also the one that should say ‘the arrogance of the thought’. It is not exactly correct. It is only when nature is behaving its own behavior or when it is possible to reason its behavior we can describe the natural phenomenon as the law or the hypothesis. Kant has written that ‘all things that occur, even if it will be saying hypothetically, are inevitable’. (” Critique of Pure Reason”, ‘Refutation against the idealism’, Japan Iwanami Bunko first volume P307) All the hypothesis and the philosophical all structures which are made hypothetically cannot be acceptable all their assertions (words).


δ. Error of Marx


  1. The world of Marx is the world of the fiction. The society which assumes the homogeneity of labor and the coessentiality of society is assembled.


  1. About the homogeneity of labor, if it is suppose that 10,000 persons are here with order of A B C D– – – -. That these people to work, that is, labor (Marx called this labor “outlay of human labor force of the physiological meaning”.) are placed equally in unit A of the same price. This is the basis of Marx’s economic theory. On this basis, the exchange theory that changed unit A to labor hours have been built up.


  1. Only saying easily, too, we find that Marx truncated the significance that a human being lives for variously, and he composed his theory. And he had been approving such a truncation in a draft of his ‘doctoral thesis’. There is no reason society thus fabricated is freedom.



  1. In the article, the quotation of Dr. Popper, Hegel and Kant is translated from Japanese to English. Please consult the ones that are published in each country.

The end of the socialism

The end of the socialism


Kinton clouds go


* This sentence is a republishing one that was written on December 13, 2013. During these days, Mr. Liu Xiaobo has been passed away on July 13, 2017, and the situations of society also changed. The article itself is old, too. However, the content which I write and I’m asking here is not changing. Human’s history will let the military and political tensions which are being made in Far East Asia into the past events. We have responsibilities to make this great flow of human’s history. Therefore, this is its message.

In addition, I sincerely would be praying to the soul of Mr. Liu Xiaobo.


A. The fact of the history


  1. Today, it becomes the document to describe the fact of the history.


  1. There are populations of 1.3 billion in the People’s Republic of China. And within of them, 85 million people are Communist Party members. And, the people of the Communist party have consciousness as the leader in the nation, and every day, they are thinking of the way how the nation and society that correspond with the role of each person should be, and they are doing the duties that were decided as the Party. I would say plainly the fact in front of the people of this Chinese Communist Party. In China, the role of the Chinese Communist Party as a party of one-party dictatorship came to an end. And, in the world, the curtain of a magnificent experiment of the history called the socialism would be closed by the end of the role as the instructive political party of one-party dictatorship of this Chinese Communist Party in China.


  1. This is not to say anything talking large. When I think about the one which Marx had been thinking, and consider what a human being is, and trace the footprint which the nation which calls itself socialism showed in the history, it leads to this conclusion logically. I am only trying to write it down merely. In addition, this short sentence is also written for the Chinese people and the people who have expectation to the word of “socialism” and have a longing to the word “socialism”.


  1. Needless to say, the socialism to say here is the one that Marx and Engels had submitted in the 19th century. And, its way of thinking and realization are as follows.

That is, it says that the human beings let the society’s system which the human beings produce their society from the capital (private ownership) system which is established by admitting the equality of personal ownership and the equality of individual personality under the law as the basic units of society change to the social (society possession) system which the land and the means of production change to the society possession and thereby the society changes into the system of production which individual personality and the ownership of the individual receives restrictions by the law.


  1. At first, please compare the contents of each description which is writing above about “the capital (private ownership) system” and “the social (society possession) system”.


A) The capital (private ownership) system : It is the form of production and society and it is established by admitting the equality of private ownership and the equality of individual personality under the law as the basic units of society. (Marx started from admitting this).


B) The social (society possession) system : It changes the land and the means of production to the society possession, and thereby the society changes into the system of production which individual personality and the ownership of the individual receives restrictions by the law. (I write only a conclusion. This is the society which Marx submitted. There is a utopia society beyond this. However, after all, it is stopping to utopia. For the human beings, I think everyone can understand that the society of “B” makes the worsened society than the society of “A”, clearly. Then if adding more to write, this is the truth of Marxism, and this is the limits that Marxism has.)


  1. “A” is society of the liberalism countries. Of course, this is principle, and there is a lot of contradiction in this society, too. The people who are going to suck the sweet juice which flock to around the policy-makers, and the policy-makers who are going to get a status and some profit from these people, and so on, exist in many areas. And these are not rare ones. However, the people of this society activate the check function to the injustice, and try to keep a clean society. And, the society which the people of this society always aspire to be is the society which is being raised the flag of “the humanism and public” more higher. And societies have been heading toward here.


7. “B” is the society which the current People’s Republic of China traced. The degree of freedom of the human being is different from the people of the free various countries. The ones which the people in the socialism society receive by making this degree of freedom sacrifice are abundant distributions. However, the people of the People’s Republic of China of today, lacks even the equality of distribution. (If this word of “equality” is too general, we can use the word “balance of welfare that the gap is less”.)


  1. Overseas media such as Reuters and the New York Times are reporting the accumulated property (moneymaking) of Chinese national leaders.


  1. The causes which allow such accumulation of wealth exist in the national structure of the People’s Republic of China. In other words, under the power structure of the one-party dictatorship of the Communist Party and the structure that each class governments are an administrative organization and also are a business entity, the government officials of the executive branch can choose freely a company that accepts the projects that they are planning out. Then, when the elected company is one’s relative, as for the profit, it is saved in one’s vicinity. This can be done similarly even if a company is not a relative. There is no room to do the checking function here.


  1. However, ‘the People’s Net’ on December 17, 2012 tells us that the following remarks were made at the economic forum of the People’s Republic of China (“China’s Structural Adjustment Forum”). People recognize that reform is necessary.


①. Segregation of responsibility of business entity and administrative organization

②. Segregation of responsibility of government administrator and nation-owned assets administrator

③. Segregation of government and business entity

④. In economic activity, the government must not serve as both “player” and “referee”.

⑤. Put out hands only when necessary. It must also be cautious when hands put out.


  1. The land of the People’s Republic of China is the public ownership system. It thinks that the means of production can be classified like a national-ownership, village-ownership, and group-ownership, but also, if each form can be considered the form of ownership of the various business entities that procure the means of production operation of them, it can say that this is the same as the possession system of the capitalism countries. The basics of the income are the achievement-based principle. And the People’s Republic of China, by the introduction of a private company by the economic reform and opening up, has adopted in their country foreign companies (technology and fund) which can carry out their economic policies that they planned. As a result, the society greatly developed.


  1. Here, I ask myself about one problem. It is a question that “People’s Republic of China is the socialism nation, or not?” The conclusion is no. This question becomes important when thinking about human history. And it reaches one conclusion that socialism has come to an end.


  1. The possessions and the distributions of the People’s Republic of China are not it of the socialism already. However, at the same time, it can say that such an example which we can see in the moneymaking news by the families of national leaders who are reported occurs, because Chinese society holds residuum of the socialism called the one-party dictatorship of the Chinese Communist Party,


  1. In other words, the People’s Republic of China is, as they are saying, “the socialism market economic nation”, and despite the economy accomplished conversion to the market economy by reform and opening up, it can says that they are holding residuum of the socialism. Well, where can we find the socialism in their country? At first, the public ownership system of the land corresponds to it. (Here, it calls the public ownership the ones which include nation ownership, group ownership.) Secondly, it is the rule system of the one-party dictatorship by the Chinese Communist Party which is indeed nothing but the negative part of the socialism.


  1. The people in China move forward to reform of the parts of this negative from now. Already, there are people who are going ahead to its duty, as we know. And if it says by the expression that Chinese people will be easy to understand why the reform is necessary, there are various contradictions that is hard to solve between the people of modern China and the reign mechanism which suppress the people by the power of one-party dictatorship of the Chinese Communist Party which are inherent in, and for its resolution, the people’s wisdom and the political system that solve contradictions by the party politics of the two parties or more and the democracy by the parliamentary are necessary. This is its reason.


  1. As can be seen from their “The communique of the Third Plenary Meeting of the 18th Central Committee”, the people of Chinese Communist Party will stick to the word “socialism”. Because, surely, in the word of this “socialism” holds “the residuum of the socialism = the politics of one-party dictatorship by the Communist Party” that is the reason which they are them. They have developed China’s society and economy so far. But, by this reason which Chinese society has developed so far, this political system has finished its role. Toward political party politics by political parties of two or more which are on the equality with each other, and take responsibility for China and world people together, China must open the way.


B. the vision of the new China


  1. The vision of new China is the problem of the people in China. In China, already, the zero-eight charter exists. The people of reformists who carry forward the new citizen (public citizen) movement, the human rights activity and the constitution movement exist. The people of the China Democratic Party exist. The innumerable people who demand their rights to the government, and who demand the recovery of the loss that they lost to the government exist. The people of Tibet and Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region are seeking independence. And there are the people of the reformist in the Chinese Communist Party. The vision of new China will be pictured by these people. We wish next things. ①. It’s that the new China is the peaceful nation of “mutual benefit ・ peace”, ②. It’s that their Idea is the same one which “the society is raising higher the flag of public, humanism and freedom” which the liberalism nations are aiming.


  1. About handling of the land


A) The considerable prudence is necessary to handle the land which is made the public land at present. In modern China, wealth is unevenly distributed. Foreign capital will also participate. In case of the co-ownership land in the farm village area, after each land becomes private land, if the land of small landowners will be taken up exclusively, the relationship like an old-time peasants and landowners occurs, its situations will become worsening than before. Also, as for the distribution of city areas, the section that performs it has the possibility to become the den of the rights of benefit. The person who tries to get an enormous fortune by reselling obtained land, surely, will also appear. If such a situation occurs, the reform becomes to naught, the gap between the rich and the poor and have-nots and those who have, has the possibility to become more than now. This gap comes to be fastened by the ownership. When such a situation comes to occur in wide China, it is nothing other than the confusion anymore.


B) The zero eight charter is writing as follows. “(We) establish the nation-owned asset management committee which owe responsibility to the highest public opinion agency, and expand legally the reform of the property’s rights by deciding the order, and clarify the attribution destination of property rights and a person in charge.” This is not enough. It is necessary to make the strict penalty regulation to the bribery and corruption. It is necessary to organize the buying and selling chase committee and the watching ethics committee against the above committees. Moreover it is necessary to give the measures that each committee has the authority which can prohibit buying and selling and the resale. Nonetheless, scholar and policy proposal person who speak as spokesman of broker or foreign capital that want to acquire profit by buying and selling the land will be always emerging. The discussion that must be including until its economic effect and it is necessary to perform thoroughly.


C. The words of conclusion


  1. The socialism of China has ended. From now, the people of China will head for the reform of the political system which is the residuum of the socialism. And, the reformers will be going ahead by putting the construction of the society which is raising higher the flag of public, humanism, liberalism in their beliefs that base of their own acts impregnably. Their beliefs are identical to the beliefs of our liberalism nations. And China will achieve further growth.

About the freedom

About the freedom


Akamon, Tokyo university


* This sentence is a republishing one that was written on June 23 2013.


A. Freedom and society


  1. The concept (the meaning and the contents which the word contains) of the freedom is the concept which is higher than the concept of the socialism or the communism which appeared so far in the history.


  1. In the freedom society, the human beings have higher sociality than the socialism society and the communism society which have been professed by it-self and which appeared so far in the history, and the freedom society develops into the more higher level.


B. The moral and the good which the freedom societies have.


  1. In the concept of the freedom contains the concept of the moral and the good. Also in the concept of the socialism and the communism too contain the concept of the moral and the good. However, the concept of the moral and the good in the concept of the freedom make a difference from each concept of the socialism and communism.


  1. The forming of the moral and the good in the freedom societies owes to individual human’s spontaneities of their societies. We call these individual human’s spontaneities the independent human beings’ lively activities. Society is formed not only the moral and the good but by the individual human’s spontaneities. And society will always try to open opportunities equally for these human being’s spontaneities (we must do so). We call this liberalism society.
  2. The moral and the good of the freedom society are formed by the individual human’s spontaneities = the independent human beings’ lively activities. As for the freedom society, the general will of the independent human beings becomes a social moral and the good, and it takes effect on the independent human beings again and forms the morality “that should be in this way “. The freedom society is improved with the interaction of these independent human beings’ lively activities and the society, and moves forward.


C. The moral and the good which the socialism, the communism society, or the exclusionism society has.


  1. The moral and the good which the socialism, the communism, or the exclusionism society has are made by a few members or one group in the society.


  1. Their moral and good, in case of the nation, are forced to all the members in society by no passing through the procedure that get approval of social-composition member all the members, or by the suspected procedure.


  1. In these nations , the liberty of the obtaining of information, the free speech, the freedom of academic are restricted, and generally, the opportunities for the voluntary desire of a human are not ” always equal “. We call these societies the society which closed one.


  1. Also, when the moral and the good are done in the one group in the society, their self-identity often appears as aggression against the others, and this is called an exclusionism.


D. The requirements for the liberty


  1. To be liberties, it develops democracy, and the enough discussions to reach an agreement are performed and the system that makes a decision must be always considered.


  1. To avoid a solution of the problem by the violence, it is necessary to let be parliamentarism.


  1. The people grow up, it avoids the politician whom rides populism, sensationalism and collects votes, and the politician who have good morality, who is able to trust to the nation’s fate must be chosen.


E. The one which the liberalism society aims at.


  1. The people and the society move to head toward the beauty and good. In other words, “The way that the people and the society must be is beautiful and good “, this is the one which the liberalism society aims at.


  1. In the realization of this “the people and the society are beautiful and good” society, the liberalism society is the higher society and moreover it is able to prove that it is the society which can aim at the high one more.

What is the self?

What is the self?

* This sentence is a republishing one that was written on October 5, 2013.  Here is description of self-conviction. I am excepting other contents.


Evening sky of July


A.What is the self ?


  1. The self is a nature.


  1. All right, the self that is a nature does self-conviction by what?


  1. The self confronts the nature including cities. And by drawing the self explicitly in there and does it.


  1. How does it do any way?


  1. The self chooses the object world ( the field ) which tries to express the self from the inside of the nature that is the world including cities. And the self expresses itself to the world. We call this act an occupation or work. In this act, the self aims the object world at being the good, and at being the beauty. That is, the act of the self must be good.


  1. The self is not only one person in the world. Similarly, there are living other selves. If this is called another person, only with the relation with other persons occurs the relation of the person and the person, and the community is born. In this case, the word of first saying ‘community’ cannot yet have its strict character’s rule, and it says the miscellaneous relation that self and other persons involve. Relationship with the self and other persons is held by mutual respect. The means of keeping this relation is a communication, that is, the dialog.


  1. From here, the first community is reformed to a community that have a group character’s rule from a state that is called “crowd”, and next, it heads for the middle scale community and large community which is a gathering of small communities. And it establishes the nation.


  1. The world is made in this way. The gathering of the self makes the world. And we call the self the independent constituent (= the entity) of the world.


  1. Here, there is the self (the independent constituent=the entity) involved in the way how should be the community, the state, the world.


  1. The system which guarantees this is the democracy. And, the system which guarantees to be being the freedom that human beings (=the independent constituents=the entities) are is the liberalism.


  1. The democracy is a system. Even if a leader of one country, a mission statement of the party, a constitution, declares “Our country is a democracy”, it is not a thing guaranteeing that the country is a democracy nation.


  1. The democracy is, there are elections, multiple political parties and the Parliaments, the Cabinet is composed by members of Parliament that have been elected, is the system that is able to alternate the Cabinet which operates the Government by election. Japan is the State of the Cabinet by the Lawmakers System. There is the State of the Presidential System like the United States, too. The system is clearly stated in the law.


  1. The modern law is made by dialogue and is reformed.


  1. The parliament and elections are the places where the people each other dialogue about the way how should be the state and themselves, and determine it. Therefore, the people comply with these laws which are results of their dialogs, and the people will protect their State system strongly.

About the assertion

About the assertion


* This sentence is a republishing one that was written on September 1, 2013. In places which are mentioning in the sentence, it includes the sentence which are not yet translated into English.


A. At beginning

  1. Previously, I wrote about Kant on June 26, 2011. I will also make a subject the same problem today.
  2. At its time (June 26, 2011), I took up “Critique of Practical Reason” and wrote as “the criticism of Hume” and “the view (explanation) of Kant”.
  3. The historical fact that the first edition of “Critique of Pure Reason” of Kant had been published is Year 1781. The publishing of “Critique of Practical Reason” is Year 1788. Regarding Hume, the publishing of “A Treatise of Human Nature Vol. 1, About Intellect” is year 1739. And his survival year is from 1711 to 1776. In other words, Hume did not see the publication of Kant’s “Critique of Pure Reason”.


  1. However, saying about the living year of two philosophers, Hume is 1711 – 1776 and Kant is 1724 – 1804. A birth day of Hume and Kant is different of only about 13 years. Kant wrote “The first principle of metaphysical recognition” in 1755, and wrote “The only possible basis of the evidence on the existence of God” in 1763. The caused problem by Hume had impacted on Kant. Therefore, Kant wrote “Critique of Pure Reason”. This thing has a great meaning in the history of civilization of the human being.

* It is not certain when Kant read Hume. According by a translator commentary of Kant’s all book collections which is No 3 volume (Iwanami Shoten, October 2001), when Kant ‘s “First principle of metaphysical recognition” had been published in 1755, the translation of Hume’ s works that say “Investigation” ( original spelling of title is unspecific) was published in German. Kant wrote “the time which had interrupted of his own snooze by receiving influenced the method of Hume’s philosophy” as “vor vielen Jahren”. And he confessed this in “Prolegomena”. Depending on how reading “vor vielen Jahren”, Hume’s method existed in Kant’s consciousness relatively early, it seems.


  1. In other words, the problem that Hume and Kant in the 18th century had grappled with is meaningful, even if in today too, and this blog is thinking that it is the theme which must be repeatedly asked. In this sense, what this blog wrote as “the criticism of Hume” and “the assertion of Kant” shows the attitude that will be going to try and treat the theme which Hume and Kant thought about, as a human problem in the history of civilization. Together with the sincerity that Kant showed to Hume, this blog thinks that it would want to say this thing.


B.  Re-posting of “the criticism of Hume” and “the assertion of Kant”

Hume: The combination of someone A and some other thing B is given by the perception, the logical right, and the experience. In the combination of “A and B” that doesn’t experience this recognition process, for example when it is declared A is B, even though there is no things which mediates the cause or subject A and the contents of assertion or predicate B, if the inevitable combination of A and B, or a-priori (transcendental) recognition of A is told, the concept itself of this A is a falsehood and is a deception and is an illusion.

Source: Kant ‘ Critique of Practical Reason’ Part 1, First part, Chapter 1, Section 8-2


Kant: Speaking of the concept of the Being who would be owned pure will (free will), it is the concept of the cause such as Noumenon (Being who create the Existence and the Nature=Universe). Moreover, the concept of this cause, if considering its origin, does not concern any emotional conditions at all. In addition, such method cannot corroborate by the intuition that is possible only to be emotional always. Therefore, the cause such as Noumenon, even if it is possible about the theoretical use of the reason, and even if the concept that it can be thought, it is nothing but the concept that is emptiness (no contents). However, besides, as far as a certain Rational Being has pure will, more than this, in the other words, I ‘m not asking that I know theoretically what this Being is. As for me, it merely display such Being as such a thing by this concept, and therefore it is enough that tie a concept of the causativeness to a concept of the freedom, that is, the moral law as rule basis of the causativeness, and this cannot separate from the concept of the freedom. And I am surely being given the competency to dare to do such a causal coupling.

Source: Kant ‘ Critique of Practical Reason’ Part 1, First part, Chapter 1, Section 8-2


  1. Here, Kant describes about the existence of God as the basis that he and a human being are moral. A difficult problem occurs here. That is, it is the problem that says whether or not the human assertion grounded on God is able to establish without the proof. Jesus is so. I would say sincerely so that there would be no misunderstanding, what I’m saying here is not about a miracle.


  1. The Jesus would be done many assertions by the basis of this God. Enlil of Sumer has the old proto-form of this God. About this, please refer to an article of July 31, 2011 of this blog (Japanese version), “Moses’ Ten Commandments”.


  1. In association with this, I looked over Max Weber’s “Ancient Judaism”. Although I did not care at that time, in his description there is a place that must read carefully compared to the scripture of the Bible.


  1. Weber wrote, “When this God was accepted by Israel, it had been already worshiped outside Israel. The tribes that had worshiped this God by organized manner were Bedouin tribes and several tribes of the oasis that bordered Israel in the south.” (” Ancient Judaism Ⅰ” Misuzu Syobou 1962 P196 ) However, we can see that it is not so, if we read the Bible. When Terra, the father of Abraham, had left from Ur, there was already a God in the clan, and the saying that same God would be been appeared as Yahweh at the time of Moses is the correct context of history.


  1. Today’s theme is about “the assertion”. However, the subject of today is not the question to say whether or not the human assertion grounded on God is able to establish without the proof. The main subject is the assertion that the human being does. However, I think before that, about the assertion which bases on God, and want to put to touch a little. The branch point of permission of this assertion is whether it makes alive all human beings and creatures or it is the one which is going to destroy human beings and creatures. I would be thinking so.


B. The assertion in today


  1. Today’s assertion has not its number limit. There are assertions both always where there is conflict.


  1. The modern world is established on the historical accumulation of human daily acts.


  1. Wittgenstein says, “1. The world is a sum of the facts in logical space. The world is the whole of an established matter.” (“Logisch-Philosophische Abhandlung” 1921 Germany), (Japanese version: Hosei University Publication Bureau 1968).


  1. The basis of judgment to say that the assertion is true or false, and that we adopt it or abandon it, it is whether the assertion is able to contribute to development of the freedom and democracy of human beings. And it is whether its assertion is able to give hope and backbone to live to people or not. In this way, history is stacked, and advances forward.


  1. Freedom and democracy are one set of value judgments. If it is only democracy, any dictatorship states always assert that own country is a democracy state.

Evening light in July

Information 2

Information 2


Entries RSS and Comments RSS.


  1. Entries RSS and Comments RSS are displayed normally in Internet Explorer 11 and Mozilla Firefox.


  1. Microsoft Edge and Google Chrome indicate html syntax.


  1. It is unconfirmed in Safari.


  1. Please be careful when using RSS.


July 9, 2017

Site administrator


sky of July

About the hope

About the hope

* This sentence is part of the Japanese version “nichinichiro” on November 20, 2013. Here is writing about that equality of opportunities of education and occupation which is basic rights of human beings and the basis for society’s development.


A. About the hope


  1. What is the one that is called the hope? If thinking it, in the case of a human being, it seems like saying a purpose that a human being produces a good outcome that is different from a state that is now today, at later time of after a state that is now.


  1. I want to do it this way tomorrow. I will do it this way tomorrow. This is the will. And the continuation of this intention, and the continuation and accumulation of action by will is made toward the achievement of hope. The hope of this case is also called a goal. Then, when we achieved our hopes, we picture a next new hope in our minds. And we will continue to walk.


  1. What are hopes of society? A birth of a new life (baby) in society becomes a hope of the society. If it is the ancient times, its child grows up and may go to journey of the founding of a new country with leading his clan. If it is modern or recent ages, its baby does new invention or discovery and may change the society until then. Its baby has the possibility that may build a new system like the United Nations and EU, and build a new social frame like TPP. However, there is also the opposite case. Its child becomes a dictator and delate the people’s vigor and may annihilate a country. Its baby may degenerate to the bad guy. This parable is not a fictitious story. Rather it is the reality of our world.


  1. However, the future of children who are born is the same in that their children’s future possibility is infinite if the society in which their children were born is a society with homogeneous ethical norms. How its child grows depends on what its child encounters in the process of growth and how its child digests social norms and how its child is aware of responsibility for the future of society. It is the persons and education that teaches them social norms in their youth. And in there, the principle that students and learning children that have not enough learning financial resources are given the opportunity to receive scholarships and are given the opportunity to learn and to challenge equally is necessary.


  1. The society is unequal. From the time that children were born, depending on their parents’ financial strength and status, the range of that children’s choices, it is wide or narrow, is already different. The principle which corrects this unequalness is the principle of equal opportunity of society. And it is the principle of equal opportunity of occupations which all opportunities that can get all professions are being given to every human beings. We can call the society in which this principle is consistent as a society where we can have hope.


  1. Shall the hope of society that this equality of opportunity penetrates overlap our hope? It is overlapping. The world is, the hope of the people have been coming to pull the society. And there is current now. Hope has been changing the world.


B. People with hope change the world.


  1. The human beings are always together with the hope. And, people with hope will change the world and society.


sky of July



1.The blog, “nichinichiro” that previously had been published on
WordPress prepared to release again on WordPress.

2.Before releasing again the blog “nichinichiro”, at first I had been trying to build an independent server its own. However, as a site administrator, when I think the duty of security to many readers of this blog, the risk of an independent server its own was too large, I didn’t adopt it this time.

3.Therefore, this site is been releasing, using a rental server of the major as telecommunications company.

4.As a blog administrator, I’m paying scrupulous attentions to security.
Dear friends, please be paying enough attention to security. I would be hoping to receive many friendly comments such as impressions and opinions. I’m thanking very much your visits.

July 1, 2017
Site administrator

a distant view (Boso direction, Tokyo Bay)

Hello world!