Backgrounds
Which thinker has influenced me and how?
Although I have studied many thinkers, not all of them have made a deep impression on me. Here I briefly describe the most profound of them, along with their most influential books.
Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche (1844-1900)
Nietzsche, with his deep criticisms on science, ethics, philosophy, culture, politics and human sciences, has undoubtedly exerted the greatest impact on me. His most profound book for me is The Will to Power. Nietzsche believes that the way to improve humans is to revalue all the existing values. His books are highly meaningful to me. I feel like it has been written for me. I would like to write a lot about Nietzsche and I will start this activity when I start my PhD program.
Sigmund Freud (1856-1939)
One of the most powerful thinkers who has influenced me is Freud. His book, entitled Interpretation of Dreams has opened up a new window for anthropology by addressing the concept of unconsciousness. I have read 23 books and articles written by Freud. In my opinion, Freud has proposed a new way of thinking rather than a discipline called psychoanalysis. I would like to write more about this impression of Freud in the future.
Edmund Husserl (1859-1938)
I got to know Husserl well through the book, entitled Cartesian Meditations. He was the origin to think deeply about man and existence. The concept of transcendental ego and philosophy in his works are very informative for me. In my opinion, Husserl, like Nietzsche and Freud, is a direction to understand the human unconscious.
Arthur Schopenhauer (1860-1788)
I found the concept of determinism of life in the meaningful book, namely The World as Will and Idea. The limitations of human perception and the destruction of the myth of wisdom in this book distanced me from the prejudice of science. It led me to have a scientific view of science and to act more flexibly when it comes to changing my scientific theories. This thinker and his book are a summary of all his preceding philosophers.
Wilhelm Dilthey (1911-1833)
The discipline observed in phenomenological concepts in Dilthey’s works, especially in the profound book, entitled Introduction to the Human Sciences, was highly instructive for me. His book directed my studies and research in human sciences towards systematic thinking. That is, the concepts I created from my phenomena had to be interconnected in a systematic way; otherwise, I would not be able to consider them scientifically valid. In addition, I have good criticisms and corrections about Dilthey’s thought, based on which I consider myself to be his best pupil to date. I am trying to review and publish his thoughts in my research life. He is the most forgotten thinker of the West (in the East).
Karl Popper (1902-1994)
No one is more successful than Popper in defending democracy owing to his book, entitled The Logic of Scientific Discovery. He put the definition of science as the criterion of democracy. For this reason, democracy is a scientific political system as it exposes political systems to falsification. I have read lots of opinions in philosophy of science, including, Thomas Kuhn, Imre Lakatos, Paul Feyerabend, Ludwig Wittgenstein, Rudolf Carnap, Bertrand Russell, and other scholars. However, only Popper was able to properly treat the deep European fear of dictatorial systems by means of science and find a logical way to compensate for that fear. He is the best example of a middle class who defended democracy as a decent political system in his time. He is a great teacher for generations., for those who want to know what the nature of science is.
Karl Marx (1818-1883)
His emphasis on the capitalist economic system, the concept of surplus production, and alienation of man from his own existence was amazing especially in the books, entitled Feuerbach and the End of Classical German Philosophy and Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844. Everyone should know Marx because still many researchers consider the common understandings of capitalism about money, work, and the economic system as the premise of their research and analysis. For this reason, they cannot think of building a new world.
Jean-Paul Sartre (1905-1980)
His amazing book called Being and Nothingness is full of contradictory and surprising ideas. Various lessons and phenomena that are structured in a coherent way stimulate my curiosity.
Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel (1831-1770)
His book, entitled The Phenomenology of Spirit, especially its second chapter (The Actualization of Rational Self-Consciousness Through Itself) is like a powerful spotlight that makes many parts of human behavior (such as love and hate) meaningful to me.
Martin Heidegger (1889-1976)
In the book of Being and Time, he introduces man as a historical being. History and Time is a way of being for him. It is amazing. In my opinion, Heidegger has expressed neuroscience and genetics in a philosophical language. The central core of his book is the historicity of human existence, which means the past, present, and future are one thing, namely time. In fact, time is another name for man. For this reason, the title of his book is Being and Time, which is an irony about the lack of distinction between them.
Ludwig Wittgenstein (1889-1951)
Two of his books, entitled Tractatus and Philosophical Investigation, showed me how the formation of what man calls wisdom is. He showed me how words are formed. The language game approach is used to understand an important part of life where we want to understand what the meaning of words is, what the interpretation is, and how the words are understandable to us. These two books are not only Wittgenstein’s writings, they are Wittgenstein’s magic.
David Hume (1711-1776)
I have not read David Hume’s books yet. But I have read his topics in the writings of other authors. His criticism of human perception and his examination of the limitations of thought are very informative for me. In my opinion, his project is highly similar to that of John Locke and Immanuel Kant since all three philosophers have tried to show the limitations of thought and perception. I believe that studies like David’s can assist strengthen the culture of democracy because if people like David Hume had not spent their lives identifying the limits of perception, human selfishness would have been strengthened and dictatorial systems would have grown. David Hume’s criticism teaches that human thought is limited and that metaphysical thoughts are a representation of the internal conditions of man rather than a reflection of the outside of the mind.