Mebadi Uluslararası Felsefe Dergisi

An Enlightenment Thinker in the Early Republican Period: Ahmet Ağaoğlu

2025-06-12T23:12:49+03:00

This study focuses on Ahmet Ağaoğlu’s ideas shaped by his conception of Westernism. This focus has been chosen because, unlike his other ideological inclinations such as nationalism, Jadidism, and Iranism—which he supported in a more contextual and temporal manner—Westernism remained a consistent and unwavering element of his intellectual outlook throughout his life. For Ağaoğlu, Westernism represented a comprehensive system of thought that prioritized individual development and was fundamentally grounded in freedom of thought and expression. According to him, the West emerged as a developed and advanced civilization precisely because it upheld these values, whereas the East remained stagnant and underdeveloped due to its suppression of individual autonomy and its preference for dogmatism and authoritarianism over liberty. In this context, Ağaoğlu viewed the East—what he considered a defeated civilization—as one that must emulate the West in every aspect. Although his proposed solution remains open to critical discussion, the study concludes that Ağaoğlu’s persistent emphasis on democracy and freedom—especially during a period when authoritarian regimes were gaining prominence both domestically and internationally, and liberal economic principles were being widely abandoned—renders his ideas still relevant and significant in contemporary discourse.

Truth, Meaning, and Language in Frege and Nietzsche A Comparative Study

2025-06-01T14:51:37+03:00

This article explores the contrasting yet occasionally intersecting views of Gottlob Frege and Friedrich Nietzsche on language, meaning, and truth. While Frege is known for formalizing the logical structure of language and distinguishing between sense (Sinn) and reference (Bedeutung), Nietzsche develops a genealogical critique of truth, arguing that concepts are rooted in metaphor and conditioned by historical and psychological forces. Despite their opposing aims—Frege seeking semantic stability through logic, Nietzsche exposing the instability behind all linguistic claims—both thinkers challenge the assumption that language transparently reflects reality. They share an awareness of language’s mediating role in shaping thought, although they interpret its implications differently: Frege emphasizes logical objectivity and compositionality, while Nietzsche stresses perspectivism, interpretation, and the constructive force of metaphor. Through a comparative analysis, this paper highlights not only their diverging ontologies of language but also their shared recognition of the tension between language and reality. Ultimately, the dialogue between Frege’s analytic clarity and Nietzsche’s critical suspicion reveals two influential frameworks for understanding the limits of meaning and the nature of truth. By tracing both convergence and divergence in their accounts, this article contributes to a deeper understanding of contemporary debates on the epistemology of language and the foundations of philosophical semantics.

A Comparative Look at the Problem of Evil in the Specificity of Ibn Arabi and Rumi

2025-06-01T14:54:34+03:00

The question of the origin of good and evil has been a recurring debate throughout the history of thought. In Abrahamic religions, good is always associated with God, while evil is not associated with God. So while good is recognized by consensus, evil becomes a problem. The concepts of good and evil, which are central to the philosophy of religion, have been debated throughout history, regardless of whether one believes in God or not, and they continue to be debated.The aim of our literature review is to examine how evil, which has been debated in various fields and has become a philosophical problem, is viewed from a comparative perspective by two key figures in Sufism: Ibn al-Arabi and Rumi. The study consists of an introduction and three main sections. The introduction gives a general overview of the concepts of good and evil and the problem of evil.The first section presents Ibn al-Arabi's views, while the second section focuses on Rumi’s perspectives. The final section concludes the discussion and locates the problem of evil in the realm of Sufism on the basis of these perspectives. This study can be seen as an attempt to evaluate the views of two important figures who have profoundly shaped Sufism on a topic that is highly debated in the field. Indeed, the subjects these scholars addressed as the leading intellectuals of their time remain relevant today, providing us with foundational insights through the branches of the tree of truth that extend to our era.

A Discussion on Truth in the Context of the Hegel – Kierkegaard Contradiction

2025-06-20T15:34:16+03:00

The clash of the views of two philosophers who lived in the 19th century is also important in the context of developing critical thinking. Therefore, this study aims to reveal Kierkegaard's existential and subjective truth in contrast to Hegel’s universal and objective philosophy. Deep differences have emerged between Hegel and Kierkegaard because of their different perspectives on the problem of truth. It is important to try to determine the problems around which this opposition develops. In this respect, it is necessary to try to explain the opposition of existential philosophy with system philosophy through the disagreement between the two philosophers, and this is another aim of the study.

Existential Ethics in Sartre's The Flies

2025-06-02T22:14:19+03:00

This article analyzes Jean-Paul Sartre’s play The Flies (Les Mouches) within the framework of existentialist philosophy. Focusing on Sartre’s core concepts such as freedom, responsibility, and bad faith (mauvaise foi), the study examines the ethical dimension of individual choice. Far beyond a mythological narrative, The Flies is treated as a philosophical drama addressing authority, historical guilt, and collective conscience. Through the character of Orestes, the process of existential liberation is contrasted with the passivity of Electra and the people of Argos. The article also compares The Flies with Sartre’s other major plays (No Exit, Dirty Hands, The Respectful Prostitute), presenting a comprehensive analysis of Sartre’s evolving theatrical vision. The concept of “theater of situations” is discussed in detail, illustrating how Sartre brings his philosophical ideas to the stage. Supported by the theoretical contributions the study highlights Sartre’s theater as not only aesthetic, but also ethical and political. Ultimately, The Flies is shown to be a powerful existentialist drama that stages the burden of freedom in its historical context, transforming the audience into ethical participants.

A Debate on the Purpose of Law: The Hart and Fuller Conflict

2025-05-28T16:06:05+03:00

This article aims to examine the Hart–Fuller debateone of the most striking intellectual confrontations in XX. century legal philosophy through the lens of the “purpose of law.” H. L. A. Hart, a leading representative of contemporary legal positivism, conceptualizes law as a system of norms whose validity is grounded in social facts and the position of rules within the legal system, independent of moral evaluations. In contrast, Lon L. Fuller, who reinterprets the natural law tradition in a modern context, defines law as a purposive enterprise based on an internal moral structure, capable of guiding human behavior. The views of Hart, who defines law as a normative system, and Fuller, who considers it a moral and purposive order, reflect a profound theoretical divergence concerning the nature, validity, and legitimacy of law. The opposition between Hart’s understanding of legal validity and Fuller’s emphasis on the internal morality of law is not merely a clash of legal theories but also a reflection of a deeper philosophical debate about the function of law in human life and the source of its binding force. This article analyzes this confrontation and offers a comparative evaluation of the differing theoretical perspectives on the purpose of law.

A Critical Perspective on Habermas’s Approach to the Gaza Massacre and the Question of Pa-lestine

2025-06-04T06:23:51+03:00

Following the world wars, humanity entered a period of profound existential crisis. Fundamental values that once rendered life and its meaning intelligible began to lose their significance. In an attempt to overcome this crisis or to re-establish the lost sense of meaning, existential philosophy emerged as a response. One of the principal functions of philosophy—particularly moral and political philosophy—is to underscore the sanctity of human life and to seek the possibility of a moral and livable world for all human beings. Indeed, movements such as the Renaissance, the Reformation, the Enlightenment, and the emergence and global acceptance of human rights are all manifestations of this philosophical orientation.However, when the subject pertains to regions outside the Western world, even philosophy—which is assumed to be the most 'universal' of disciplines—either remains local in its impact or, regrettably, falls under the sway of particular powers, thereby failing to fulfill its essential vocation. Of course, this failure is not inherent in philosophy itself but lies with the philosophers who enact it. In this context, the pro-Israeli statements and the declaration signed by Jürgen Habermas regarding the question of Palestine and the Gaza massacre have elicited significant reactions both within philosophical circles and across global public opinion. This paper aims to offer a critical examination of such attitudes, focusing broadly on Western intellectuals and specifically on the renowned philosopher Habermas.

Thomas Stern: Nietzsche’s Ethics, Cambridge University Press, 2020

2025-05-02T03:09:04+03:00

Thomas Stern’s Nietzsche’s Ethics focuses on Nietzsche’s mature ethics. Instead of an apologetic or creative reading, Stern promises a reading which carefully follows Nietzsche’s texts in the light of his intellectual background and which presents the philosophical ideas or positions presented in them in a clear, unbiased and as detailed a manner as possible. In this context, Stern discusses the basic assumptions, general structure, and tensions of Nietzsche’s mature ethics; what Nietzsche is trying to achieve by producing a genealogy of Christian morality and to what extent he achieves it; the relations between some of the basic assumptions in Nietzsche’s ethics and some of the ideas or themes that can be found in his broader philosophy; and finally, the possibility of a Nietzschean ethics today. Thus, Stern offers a very clear account of Nietzsche’s mature ethics that demonstrates his mastery of Nietzsche’s corpus and intellectual-historical background and also of the secondary Nietzsche literature. It must be said, however, that the Nietzsche Stern thus portrays is less likely to win our sympathy than the Nietzsche portrayed in apologetic or creative readings. But therein, in part, lies the value of Stern’s book: it presents a challenge that should not be ignored by those who believe that a more sympathetic portrait of Nietzsche is more accurate.