Train from Córdoba has just made its entry into Atocha.Common sense torch with beret against the cold crosses the lanes with parsimony.An intense coffee in the only free corner in the dosages of Only You to talk about everything, except for yourself.This is a bit the cavern from where we illuminate aloud some shadows.
José Carlos Ruiz is a university professor of Córdoba who disseminates philosophy of everyday life with the gift of contemporary languages.And a pedagogue of life achieved fumes, with how difficult it is to drive well through the avenues of our own biographies.Thinker.Writer.teacher.Disseminator.Dad.All in order, critically separately, but humanly compact.
In 2017 Plato published Batman.Manual to educate with wisdom and values.In 2018 he took out the art of thinking.How great philosophers can stimulate our critical thinking.And then a name was made in the world without its chair sounding from Madrid or Barcelona.For example, after those pages and an interview, Carles Francino signed him for the Friday afternoons of the window.Twenty minutes of fresh air and philosophy in jeans around more Plato and less whatsapp.
His philosophy has just arrived at the libraries before the discouragement.Critical thinking to build a solid personality.In the midst of liquid societies and gaseous wills, a journey with roots, essences, raw material and substantial form.
Background, a bar bar.In front, the light, the cars of Madrid, the life on wheels at very speed.People who go and who come in these first days of real autumn, cold, dry leaves that precipitate on sidewalks as metaphors of wives without chlorophyll.Among those people who go and go, confused in the dough, we peripate between sugarless cafes.Here, a philosopher with the age of the transition trying to fix the world from within the world.
You are a revolutionary encouraging to think now that everything points to artificial intelligence.
More than a revolutionary, I am a deep believer.Almost all civilizations and cultures have endorsed the ability of geniuses, which exceeded human barriers with their thought and imagination.Now that it seems that artificial intelligence will do, claim critical analysis, because I believe in humans above technological projections, even if they are a human construct.
Despite the mistakes, errors and disappointments, he believes more in imperfect human beings than in perfect machines.
A machine is a machine.As much as the Turing test leaves us with the mouth open by certifying an obvious technological progress, the machines will never understand or understand the people around us and will always be light years of any identity human identity process.
A prophet of critical thinking- "Critical thinking is the sum of the circumstances of the own and others, and the context"- in the midst of a society that has made criticism into a mood without constructive eagerness.
When Descartes inaugurated his methodical doubt, it was very clear that it was not a skeptical doubt, but criticism.Their method separated the problems, investigated them individually, and then contemplated them together to see if the building was held.I claim to value critical thinking at a time when thinking with distance is not fashionable, among other things because the turbotemporrality that invades us prevents reflections from sedimenting forming well.Critical thinking implies resituating in the context and circumstances that makes us human: to think, that it is the sum of reason more emotion.Indeed, I also think that in public opinion we have internalized critics as an element of destruction, but my bet goes in the opposite direction: analyze, to build.
Have you written philosophy against discouragement as a vaccine to this void that was already before the pandemic?
This book is not a self -help instrument that saves, but a diagnosis.From before the pandemic perceived a growing discouragement in different vital plots between my closest circle.He found discouraged around work projects, in personal relationships, in the education of children, in the experience of love ... I realized that I was delicately filtered by the pores of the interinity of the subjects, adults and young people.I saw in university that many newly arrived students began their career with the future.Then I stated that it could be to put a magnifying glass in each of those realities and offer a philosophical perspective to deepen.The book is not a recipe book, nor do I intend with him that the reader solves his vital problems.It is simply an analysis of the sources of discouragement in the 21st century, at least to be aware.
It offers the cane of philosophy to avoid, he says, let's be imbéciles ...
In its etymological origin, "fool" means "the one who has no cane".The point is that the word has been settling in the popular imaginary with a double meaning: on the one hand, it is an imbecile who, autonomously, considers that he does not need any cane, or that a cane is a hindrance to life.Who believes himself almighty or with full wisdom to advance his identity process without the help of others.He is a moron, because that empowered vision of himself makes him blind.And another type of moron is the one who understands that he needs to rely on a cane, because he knows that personal life experience is not enough in his life project, but no one offers it.
Write stable letters with a background in a universe of firm volatility.
Stability is a delicate concept in the 21st century.More than something stable, I try to suggest serene support points.When I write, I try to root the contents that project in the real world, exemplifying a lot.I try to expose everyday situations so that the people who read are recognized and questioned.It is my way of showing that philosophy and critical thinking are not anchored in an ideal, but that they go down to our day to day.Society is volatile and ephemeral, but there is still a point of stillness enjoyed by people who do not move in the networks and that we must claim, even from the networks.In the book I bet to return to the roots recovering the rituals.
Among those basic roots is the family.The universal personal experience is that the family is crucial in our personal development, but in public opinion a tufo carca has been installed around that reality, elementary in all societies.
Because I suppose there have been political interests to delegitimize the word and religious interests to appropriate it.When you politicize or capitalize a concept that transcends both dimensions, dirty the reality that represents and removes the brightness that corresponds to it.In a society where self -determination looks like the subject's vector axis, which, in addition, must be declared to the four independent, autonomous and innovative winds, recognize a political, social, economic or emotional dependence is not well seen.In the public debate, every time the family is discussed, the need for personal conciliation is exposed or related to problematic approaches, and this had never happened.Resituating the family as an important identity axis in a world in which identities are built in the virtual level, it is essential.Our identity signs are limited to a context and their own and foreign circumstances in our community.When community life time is replaced or equated at the time of attention of a virtual community, the family loses its ontological category.
You talk about emotional bulimia.That we vomit tired of ourselves.In one world the like prevails, but in the other we chew the Dislike.
Dislike or chew it, nor digest it ... It is one of the worst things that can happen to us in the 21st century, so there is no button on any social network, except on YouTube.Emotional Bulimia has a lot to do with an irreflexive hyperaction process: we consume experiences at great speed and to fulfill a social protocol imposed without savoring those experiences, without learning, without tasting wisdom.Society poses an imperative of customs almost obliged as Checklist: visit such a fashion restaurant, sign up for the last classes of coaching, yoga, mindfulness;Take the child to robotics ... that pressure is of such caliber that one begins to perceive that life escapes and opportunities are lost if the imposed steps are not taken, because you leave aside the successful personal project that, in theory, mustbe the most important goal of your life.
If we consume experiences only to vomit them quickly on social networks, we lose the possible nutrients of those experiences along the way.Wisdom is the implementation of vital experiences to improve the biographical route.If you vomit every experience to pass the current to the next in an infinite process, emotional bulimia will harm us.
What anorexia is behind that bulimia?
Anorexia has to do with the obsession with thinness.Now, that obsession makes more reference to lightness: wanting to constantly light luggage to all sites, without rams and without packages that complicate the personal life trip.Lipovetsky published in 2018 of lightness and says that contemporary society has turned lightness into an ontological category that hugs with primor.That implies that you can start your superficial roots and transplant other people and other places without pain.There is a happiness and a tree happiness.Emotional anorexia is related to that model of life in which we advance a grass that grows fast and colorful, but with very fragile roots.Birth rates go down, the sale of pets rises, the responsibility in the care we owe to our elders is stagnated, which are seen as a burden ... caring is seen as an obligation that catches and this century has demonized everything that smellsto duty and obligation.
Lightness does not mean going to the essence and removing what is left over, but superficiality.
Lightness is the ability to walk forward with the firm decision not to depend on anyone or anything that cannot be dispensed with, including moral loads that put peros to our autonomy.
Abjura for the teaching of the frontispiece of the temple of Apollo in Delphi, because that motto imposes a duty on marble, but without offering us the tools.Does knowing oneself not the first step to be right?
Knowing is very difficult ... The problem of "know yourself" is that the interpretation we have made is based on the ego, when the council was originally known within a socio -political context: knowing where you are in life within a social plane.But the self -help has buried the social dimension that implies the true knowledge of its own, and I abjue from that radically individualistic construction of that knowledge that pivot about the absolute ego, because it believes that it can dispense with others to know each other.
Because you are also how your wife looks at you.
I am part of my wife's identity construction, and my friends, and who work around me.When you integrate the other's look in your own knowledge, you manage to create community, and that is what we are forgetting to do.
You talk about scattered personalities, although postureo impresses us with apparently very authentic personalities.
Everyone knows what posture is, but we continue to do it.Why?Why does anyone believe that media posture has some value?In the book I dedicate a time to talk about recreation and recollection, principles that have a lot to do with confinement and subsequent increase in divorces.During that mandatory confinement, many couples have realized that they had a scattered life where the relational dynamics were made from the houses out of the house among thousands of activities.Hyperaction conditioned a lot of emotional status of the couple, which advanced with an agendnovelty in a fundamental axis and enclose you, that recollection, which should be a wonderful opportunity to join more, becomes a heavy slab.We have not worried about creating couple routines where calm and stability reinforce the ability to be comfortable.
He says we are going from Freestyle, but, in reality, we wandered uniformed, disguised as unique.
There is a social stereotype that dictates how we should be and behave to be successful people.Being unique has become a special value in the 21st century.Before, people felt happy being common.Today, normality is undervalued.Singularization is sought at any price.Between what I am and what I want to be, between my day to day and my story on social networks, sometimes there is so much distance that reality is unattractive.And you will see when the metavers are landed ...
"Normality is undervalued".Relativism has broken the concept of normality.Today, talking about normality can be almost offensive ... What is normal?Who says it?What is the relationship between normality and happiness?
We will have more possibility of happiness if normality prevails in which routine is a referential axis, than in a life where simplicity and balance are constantly broken.Routine normality is a wonderful support point to be happy.Happiness needs to be built on pillars that do not generate chronic disruptions, permanent imbalances and anxiety.
In his last book he makes entertainment philosophy, why well -being societies lead us to boredom?
I speak of the agitated boredom in which we put ourselves in the center of entertainment and, without realizing it, we seek that entertainment adapts to each of us.From that perspective, we will always be hunting for something more than fits with us one hundred percent.Entertainment must forget that egotist side to be surprised by the discoveries and the adventure they involve leaving some space to improvisation.
Live without chronic GPS.
Today, living is corroborating what we have planned before leaving home.We know the most efficient journey, we avoid losing ourselves, limiting the possibility of adventure;We know the hotel room before traveling, we virtually walk the streets of the area before landing, we travel the museum to certify that the paintings we want to see are still there, we see the trailer of the play to which we will attend ... travel from thesofa very delegitimizes the enriching experience of leaving, which includes an important discovery factor.
He talks about the collective fool, of the hypermodern idiot ... Is philosophy a hammer of disoriented heretics, a mirror, a vaccine, a wand or a patera?
I like the mirror simile, but, eye, in philosophy the important thing is not the reflection, but the surface that is reflected in the mirror itself, because we run the risk of falling in love with the reflection to the narcissus.Philosophy helps to reflect a part of the world, but the reflection is not the world, but a projection.
The patera went because those who do not want philosophy in the classrooms, are possibly betting on the wreck of future generations.
Totally.All the political groups of this country reached an agreement three years ago so that, whatever happened, philosophy remained strong in the classrooms with a three -year teaching itinerary, at least, at least.For the first time a consensus was reached that was a miracle.But it is not fulfilled, and it does not matter those who send and those in the opposition.The political referents of our society lack word.Letting something so important wreck with that frivolity is alarming.
What society does it see when you look in the eyes of your university students?
I am optimistic with the ability of human beings to overcome adversity.History attests.In addition, the transformation capacity of the contemporary young is greater than I had.If today's young man exceeds the identity construction phase, he will be very consolidated.If they leave successfully, we will have a very strong society.
In his last book he speaks of love without wanting to say sex.
There is a love-consciousness and a love-relationship.The first is impregnated with lightness without roots we talked about before and is devoid of any hint of commitment, which is understood as something negative that generates a loss of opportunities.Relational love implies commitment, an integration of the other person's gaze into your life project and an inevitable resignation.Love-cononexation is booming and sells a world without wonderful barriers, and the other is demonized, because freedom is exclusively associated with the ability of choice.
How do you learn to want if they have not taught you at home?
Loving is an innate ability of the human being.When you have children, it is not necessary for anyone to explain how you want, you simply know how to love in infinite degree.Many of our parents lived under authoritarian grandparents and have managed to reconfigure their way of expressing love.It is important that we all be clear that loving also involves suffering.Giving that is to play all letters to an exclusively pleasant love and, therefore, ephemeral.At the banquet, Plato tells us that, when Aphrodite was born, the gods celebrated a party at the Olympus.Poros drank more than the account and Penia, taking advantage of drunkenness, lay with him and became pregnant.From the union between Penia, goddess of misery, and pores, God of opportunity, Eros was born, God of love.The Greeks already taught us that love is a very complex issue and their ascending are joy, prudence and brightness, and the possibility of pain and misery.Love is a complete pack.If you eliminate Penia from the equation, you will stay with brightness and joy, but Eros will no longer be born.
It also talks about pain, because fleeing pain is harmful, but it is our recurring error.
Trying to flee from pain is consubstantial to the human race.We cannot avoid it.But the pain does not flee, because when it comes, it comes.You can foresee, but little more.The human being has huge pain resistance rates, as we have seen during the pandemic.We are much more stoic than we think and we demonstrate it when the moments of pain arrive.Sometimes tools are missing to face it with success, and we go to the psychologist or the psychiatrist to help us manage it more effectively, because we lack experience to know howinevitable.
He says that "a strange sensation invades current times: the feeling of being incomplete".Anxiety episodes and cases of fragile will grow.What is the pill against this vulnerability, beyond admitting it?
Enhance critical analysis in each of us.You have to know where that feeling comes from that we never finished filling our identity in a kind of constant existential vacuum.Where do expectations about oneself come from?Are they based on real or virtual circumstances?
Alert about an elephantiasis of one's identity.Of reaffirmations.Of selfies.What percentage of our human salvation is in others?
If we talk about the other real, not virtual, I would say that more than 70% of our human salvation is in others.Salvation is much easier if I integrate in my vital project to those of my micro community.Do not count on others limits our growth in a gigantic way.
What importance does it give transcendence in that successful construction of our identity?
A lot!Transcendence entails getting out of the plane of the concrete.In a specialized hyper world and micro cosmic, transcending invites us to raise ourselves.If we talk about values and experiences, but we transcend to the idea, we lose the brightness of depth beyond the concrete.The human being seeks in philosophy the need to expand the field of vision through the transcendent: beauty, values ... machines can never seek transcendence.
Networks have caught us.
Social networks or connect, or catch.Connecting with other people, even if it is virtually, is positive, because it brings ideals and generates a dialogue.The problem is to depend on these connections, because then the networks become those of the fisherman.The human being is made to perform an occupation of live and live space.If I replace that occupation of the real space for a virtual space where experiences are simulated, we are out of our environment.But we suffer a kind of Stockholm syndrome and ourselves go towards the network that catches us, it takes us out of the real plane, and puts us in an artificial world where an unreal drill is lived.We pass from the living and live, to the live, and the live is beginning to understand and feel like an experience, although it will never be.
Do you see a society of happy avatars and cynical personalities?
The cynical was still a philosopher with a very high intelligence reference in classical Greece.The cynics could be great contemporary models to take life in another way, above all, with philosophy.They did not want to submit to the established power without criteria.It is not bad for us to be a network of avatars if we have a real Serena identity.The problems arise when we let many girls and boys approach the digital world without having sedimened their real identity.
Because the network is for mature people.
The network demands maturity, you have the age you have, and a pedagogy of the critical look.As the screen has come to stay, we must educate the look and start teaching tools that teach our kids that digital narrative codes are different from those of reality, and that Tik tok's are different from Instagram.Critical thinking should be almost medically prescriptive from first primary school.
APOSTOLA You simply and balance in a time of complication, identity barochism and mismatch between real life and virtual life.Have the philosophers been born to speak in the desert?
I would tell you no, because when more social difficulties exist, the more you go to philosophy.Before the pandemic, the philosophy was almost proscribed from the media plane and the self -help books were sold to helmet, because it seemed that there were the responses to the difficulties of our time, but a serious dilemma has arrived and the explanations no longer usesuperficial.It is then when the depth of the idea is sought.From there, philosophers appear in the first flat in almost all media in a miraculous way.The philosopher has become the last resort of contemporary problems without exit, because the deepest explanation is expected.I don't think we preach in the desert, although our political representatives do not want philosophy to be an indisputable matter for the formation of our next generations.
You offer thought syrup in your books, in your classes, in the window of the Being ... How do we see that we digest your suggestions: as May water, as etcigners or as an oxygenated peroxide, which briefs, but cures?
It depends on who directs me.For some academics I am an etchofiestas, because I dissemin.There is a generational percentage between 35-40 years to write me mails or direct messages through the networks and they tell me that my books are like hydrogen peroxide.They thank me for leaking them to better understand what they were living, because they did not know the problem and now, at least, they have the mental structure to incomes a change.I think these people help them cure a latent wound that did not locate rightly.It is hydrogen peroxide that briefs, because the discoveries probably lead to change some vital parameters to prevent the damage from persisting, but they gather the path of the cure.Then there are 35 years down, who listen to the twenty minutes of radio and think that they are better than books, because they are accustomed to paying attention to small pills around something that makes them think, but they do not tolerate the continuity of the continuity of the reading.For them, philosophy is a discovery.They understand that it is like May water that gives a deeper meaning to issues that were previously floating in superficiality, and thank you very much, even in a way that did not expect me, the truth.
What fascinates Francino from you?
Francino is fascinated almost everything human.His appetite for knowledge is almost infinite.Anyone who listens to his program every day will realize that he plays so many social, cultural and political sticks that it is very difficult not to get out of there enriched.This space of weekly philosophy in the being survives for its stubbornness.I have never had audience pressure.He considers that it is good that philosophy has a media plane, because he is passionate that critical analysis is part of a media that addresses many people.Moreover, consider it a moral obligation.
Why do you throw so much from South Korean by-Chul Han?
I shoot more of Byung-Chul ideas that of their generic philosophy, because it seems to me that they are very symptomatic of our time.I think it brings star ideas that give interpretive keys to micro phenomena that, if you don't analyze them, go unnoticed.I am interested in its great capacity to microscopically dissect the concrete.
What other sources of contemporary knowledge nourish your thinking?
Leo history, informative economy, philosophy, sociology, neuroeducation, pedagogy ... lately I read more about artificial intelligence and media, and less about psychology.The truth is that I don't have a specific field.I read everything that is interesting for my philosophical analysis.Philosophy today is more interdisciplinary than ever.You can't write philosophy without knowing about neurology, pedagogy, economy, or sociology.It is very difficult to define a contemporary philosopher, because it is already nourished by a very broad varied references, which is wonderful.
References with names and surnames?I have ever read praise Javier Gomá.
Javier Gomá is a reference of current Spanish philosophy.Regardless of the academic side, it has entered a high quality informative level revitalizing concepts that had disappeared from the media and philosophical debate, such as dignity or exemplarity.In addition, it has a great quality rhetoric and great closeness, and that is very difficult.Dialogue in depth, but being mundane, as he says, it is a very particular gift.Gomá is a rare avis in this world in which philosophers write for philosophers, which seems absurd, because it is as if the painters only painted for painters ...
Journalists are very speaking only for journalists.
A reduction to absurd for those who have a small speaker in front of society.Talking for a subgroup very limits all the intellectual effort that one does and slows what I consider a public service.If I have trained in this society serving, to a large extent, of the public treasury, at least part of my production should be focused on returning to society some of my knowledge.
Does asphalt philosophy.Are you also inspired singers, poets, writers, graffiti artists, tweeters ...?
Leonard Cohen has greatly influence.I have been very sentimental and very singer -songwriters.In his time, José Luis Perales and Julio Iglesias were part of my soundtrack.In my playlist they appear from Fito to Frank Sinatra, through an immense variety.I am also very jazz, and I was very inspired by writers like Raymond Car for their direct way of pointing out the problems.
In addition to "knowing yourself", what other philosophical dogmas are overvalued?
In the temple of Delphi had chiseled another phrase that said: "Not too much".It seems to me that this advice would be good to recover it, because, as Aristotle would later tell us, virtue is at that midpoint.That balance is read today as a symptom of failure, because if you are not in excess, it is because you are in the defect.
A coach would tell us that "nothing too much" is a loser phrase.
I have no doubt, because for them the world is bipolar: either you reach meritocratic success, or you are an absolute failure.It is a speech that interests from the productive point of view.
You say that "happiness has become an instrument of torture".What is Mr guilt.Wonderful of giving wings to Peter Pan societies?
I'm glad MR's business success.Wonderful, because they have managed to find the key by offering instant motivational pills.The problem is the one who reads the cup every morning and is forced to turn that phrase into a vital reality as if it were a therapy.Wholesale happiness does not exist.Each must build the principles that are the happiness of their happiness.On the other hand, I do not think we are in a childish society, but exhausted.We live with such a powerful intensity that we end up the day, that's why we go to the media and platforms to see things that entertain us and make us disconnect from the vertiginous daily rhythm.In the background, given this generalized vital tiredness, the media and platforms do a care and point-point care work.
If the ego is a balloon, what do we do?
The ego is not bad, the problem is egolatry.
If we only do, when do we think?
At least, when we finish, but if we only do, we don't think.
If we don't think, what will we die?
If we don't think, we die without identity.Kant said that it is not thought about cowardice or ignorance.If you don't think, and you die, you have not owned your life.It is very sad.I don't think we die for not thinking, but it is possible that we die without ever thinking.
And if we die that empty, what does it matter?
The problem is those who stay.Dying empty is very selfish.