Abstract
Evrenin başlangıcı, Tanrı-zaman ilişkisi ve zamanın
ontolojik statüsü gibi zamanın mahiyetiyle doğrudan ilgili metafizik problemler
başlangıcından itibaren felsefenin en önemli konularından biri olagelmiştir.
Şüphesiz bu çerçevede yapılan en önemli tartışmalardan biri de Leibniz ile
Clarke arasındaki mektuplaşmalarda karşımıza çıkar. Burada ideal ve ilişkisel
zaman anlayışını savunan Leibniz, mutlak ve reel zaman anlayışını savunan
Clarke’a önemli eleştiriler yöneltir. Leibniz’e göre mutlak zaman anlayışının
kabul edilmesi ‘yeter neden’ ve ‘özdeşlerin ayırt edilemezliği’ gibi ilkeleri
ihlal ettiğinden, zamanla ilgili tartışmalarda mantık dışı sonuçlara götürür.
Buna karşılık Clarke, Leibniz’in yönelttiği eleştirileri cevaplayarak mutlak
zaman anlayışının haklılığını göstermeye çalışır. Şüphesiz Leibniz-Clarke
arasında geçen bu tartışmalar günümüz zaman felsefesi çalışmalarının anlaşılması
bağlamında önemini hala korumaktadır.
References
- AL-AZM, S. J. (1967). Kant’s Theory of Time. New York: Philosophical Library.
- ARİEW, Roger (2000). “Introduction”, Leibniz-Clarke Correspondence, ed. Roger Ariew, ss. vii-xiv, Cambridge: Hackett Publishing Company.
- ARİSTOTELES, (2014). Fizik, çev. Saffet Babür, Ankara: Yapı Kredi Yayınları.
- ARTHUR, R. T. W. (1985). “Leibniz’s Theory of Time”, The Natural Philosophy of Leibniz. (ed. Kathleen Okruhlik and James R. Brown). Lancaster: D. Reidel Publishing Company, 263-315.
- BORDON, Adrian (2018). Zaman Felsefesinin Kısa Tarihi, çev. Özgür Yalçın, İstanbul: Türkiye İş Bankası Yayınları.
- EARMAN, Jhon (1989). World Enough and Space-Time: Absolute versus Relational Sapce and Time, Massachusetts: The MIT Press.
- HALL, A. Rupert (2002). Philosophers at War: The Quarrel Bertween Newton and Leibniz. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- GORHAM, Geoffry (2011). “Newton on God’s Relation to Space and Time: The Cartesian Framework”, Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie 93 (3): 281-320.
- KANT, Immanuel (2009). Critique of Pure Reason, trn. Paul Guyer & Allen Wood, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- KÜÇÜKPARMAK, Aykut (2017). “Kant’ın Eleştiri Öncesi Dönem Zaman Anlayışı”, Beytulhikme An International Journal of Philosophy, 7 (1): 205-223.
- LEİBNİZ, G. W. (1989). Philosophical Essays, ed. and trn. Roger Ariew and Daniel Gerber, Indianapolis & Cambridge: Hackett Publishing Company.
- LEİBNİZ, G. W. & CLARKE, S. (2000). The Correspondence, ed. Roger Ariew, Cambridge: Hackett Publishing Company.
- LEİBNİZ, G. W. (2011). Monadoloji, çev. Devrim Çetinkasap, İstanbul: Pinhan Yayınları.
- LOEMKER, Leary E. (1989). G. W. Leibniz Philosophical Pappers and Letters, London: Kluwer Academic Publisher.
- MATES, B. (1986). The Philosophy of Leibniz Metaphysics and Language, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- McGUİRE, J. E. (1978). “Existence, Actuality and Necessity: Newton on Space and Time”, Annals of Sicience 35 (5): 463-508.
- MORE, Henry (1987). The Immortality of The Soul, ed. Alexander Jacob, Lancester: Martinus Nijhoff Publisher.
- NEWTON, Isaac (1999). The Principia: Mathemathical Principles of Natural Philosophy, trn. Bernard Cohen and Anne Whitman, London: University of California Press.
- NEWTON, Isaac (1978). Unpublished Scientific Papers of Isaac Newton, ed. and trn. Hall A. Pupert & Hall M. Boas, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- VAİLATİ, E. (1997). Leibniz & Clarke A Study of Their Correspondence, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- WİNTERBOURNE, A. (1988). The Ideal and Real, London: Kluwer Academic Publisher.
Abstract
Metaphysical problems which are directly related to the
nature of time, such as the beginning of the universe, God-time
relationship and the ontological status of time, have been one of the most
important issues of philosophy since the very beginning. Undoubtedly, one of
the most important discussions in this framework is encountered in the correspondences
between Leibniz and Clarke. Here Leibniz who defends an ideal and relational
time approach criticizes Clarke who defends an absolute and real time approach. According to
Leibniz, because the acceptance of the absolute-time conception violates principles
such as ‘sufficient reason’ and ‘indiscernibility of identicals’, it will lead to
irrational conclusions in the discussions about time. On the contrary, Clarke
tries to prove the rightness of absolute time approach by answering the criticisms
of Leibniz. Undoubtedly, these debates between Leibniz and Clarke still
maintain their importance in the context of understanding today’s studies on
philosophy of time.
References
- AL-AZM, S. J. (1967). Kant’s Theory of Time. New York: Philosophical Library.
- ARİEW, Roger (2000). “Introduction”, Leibniz-Clarke Correspondence, ed. Roger Ariew, ss. vii-xiv, Cambridge: Hackett Publishing Company.
- ARİSTOTELES, (2014). Fizik, çev. Saffet Babür, Ankara: Yapı Kredi Yayınları.
- ARTHUR, R. T. W. (1985). “Leibniz’s Theory of Time”, The Natural Philosophy of Leibniz. (ed. Kathleen Okruhlik and James R. Brown). Lancaster: D. Reidel Publishing Company, 263-315.
- BORDON, Adrian (2018). Zaman Felsefesinin Kısa Tarihi, çev. Özgür Yalçın, İstanbul: Türkiye İş Bankası Yayınları.
- EARMAN, Jhon (1989). World Enough and Space-Time: Absolute versus Relational Sapce and Time, Massachusetts: The MIT Press.
- HALL, A. Rupert (2002). Philosophers at War: The Quarrel Bertween Newton and Leibniz. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- GORHAM, Geoffry (2011). “Newton on God’s Relation to Space and Time: The Cartesian Framework”, Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie 93 (3): 281-320.
- KANT, Immanuel (2009). Critique of Pure Reason, trn. Paul Guyer & Allen Wood, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- KÜÇÜKPARMAK, Aykut (2017). “Kant’ın Eleştiri Öncesi Dönem Zaman Anlayışı”, Beytulhikme An International Journal of Philosophy, 7 (1): 205-223.
- LEİBNİZ, G. W. (1989). Philosophical Essays, ed. and trn. Roger Ariew and Daniel Gerber, Indianapolis & Cambridge: Hackett Publishing Company.
- LEİBNİZ, G. W. & CLARKE, S. (2000). The Correspondence, ed. Roger Ariew, Cambridge: Hackett Publishing Company.
- LEİBNİZ, G. W. (2011). Monadoloji, çev. Devrim Çetinkasap, İstanbul: Pinhan Yayınları.
- LOEMKER, Leary E. (1989). G. W. Leibniz Philosophical Pappers and Letters, London: Kluwer Academic Publisher.
- MATES, B. (1986). The Philosophy of Leibniz Metaphysics and Language, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- McGUİRE, J. E. (1978). “Existence, Actuality and Necessity: Newton on Space and Time”, Annals of Sicience 35 (5): 463-508.
- MORE, Henry (1987). The Immortality of The Soul, ed. Alexander Jacob, Lancester: Martinus Nijhoff Publisher.
- NEWTON, Isaac (1999). The Principia: Mathemathical Principles of Natural Philosophy, trn. Bernard Cohen and Anne Whitman, London: University of California Press.
- NEWTON, Isaac (1978). Unpublished Scientific Papers of Isaac Newton, ed. and trn. Hall A. Pupert & Hall M. Boas, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- VAİLATİ, E. (1997). Leibniz & Clarke A Study of Their Correspondence, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- WİNTERBOURNE, A. (1988). The Ideal and Real, London: Kluwer Academic Publisher.
Details
| Primary Language | Turkish |
|---|---|
| Subjects | Philosophy |
| Journal Section | Articles |
| Authors | |
| Publication Date | June 30, 2019 |
| Published in Issue | Year 2019 Volume: 8 Issue: 2 |
