Deficiencies in Consciousness Studies on Newborns and Animals from Yalçın Koç's Perspective of Transcendence: Transcendence, Language and the Uniqueness of Experience
Baran BingölWhen one asks and tries to answer any question about newborns and animals, a set of assumptions is found, most of which are implicit. The most important of these involves the fundamental features that make a human being human and that distinguish humans from other living beings. In other words, if one were to have a sharply defined answer to the question of what makes a human being human, this answer would also become the answer to a set of questions about newborns and animals. For instance, if one were to say, “One of the most important features that makes human beings human, or that at least distinguishes humans from other living beings, is language and the ability to learn language,” this statement essentially leads one to assume as an example based on this that a newborn baby and a kitten have both developed as well as not developed language, because development is considered to involve learning or being able to learn a language, and as a result be able to communicate and think using language. The purpose of this paper is to question the fundamental assumptions and starting points (as in the aforementioned example) of studies on consciousness (particularly with regard to newborns and animals), of language, and of philosophy and psychology in general and to offer criticisms and suggestions within the framework of the conception of transcendence as recently developed by Yalçın Koç (Theologia’nın Esasları [The Principles of Theologia]). Finally, this study will address the relationship between having an experience and constructing a system of thought in regard to having an experience in its broadest sense, as well as the possibility of making this a science.
Yalçın Koç’un Aşkınlık Anlayışı Çerçevesinde Yenidoğanlara ve Hayvanlara Dair Bilinç Çalışmalarındaki Eksiklikler: Aşkınlık, Dil ve Tecrübenin Biricikliği
Baran BingölYenidoğanlara ve hayvanlara dair herhangi bir soru sorduğumuzda ve soruyu cevaplamaya çalıştığımızda çoğu örtük olan birtakım varsayımlarımız vardır. Bunlardan en önemlisi, insanı insan yapan ve diğer canlılardan ayıran temel unsurlar hakkındadır. Yani, “insanı insan yapan nedir?” sorusuna keskin sınırları olan bir cevabımız varsa, bu cevabımız, aynı zamanda yenidoğanlara ve hayvanlara dair birtakım soruların da cevabı haline gelir. Örneğin “insanı insan yapan veya en azından onu diğer canlılardan ayırt eden unsurların en önemlilerinden biri dildir ve dil öğrenebilmesidir” dersek, bu ifade, en temelde, dünyaya henüz gelen bebeğin ve örneğin bir kedinin yalnızca “gelişmemiş” değil, aynı zamanda “aynı zeminde gelişmemiş” olduğu yönünde bir varsayıma bizi götürür, zira dil öğrenmek veya öğrenebilmek ve bu süreç neticesinde alışageldiğimiz, bildiğimiz anlamda diller aracılığıyla iletişim kurabilmek ve düşünebilmek “gelişmek”tir. Bu yazının amacı, yenidoğanlara ve hayvanlara dair özellikle bilinç çalışmalarının, bu eksende yürütülen dil ve en genel anlamda felsefe ve psikoloji araştırmalarının (yukarıdaki örnekteki gibi) temel varsayımlarını ve hareket noktalarını sorgulamak ve son dönemde Yalçın Koç’un geliştirdiği aşkınlık tasavvuru çerçevesinde eleştiriler ve öneriler sunmaktır. Son olarak, bir tecrübe sahibi olmak ile en geniş anlamıyla tecrübe sahibi olmaya dair bir fikriyat inşa etmek ve -mümkünse- bilimini yapmak arasındaki ilişkiye değineceğiz.
When one asks and tries to answer any question about newborns and animals, one has a set of assumptions, most of which are implicit. The most important of these concerns the fundamental features that make human beings human and that distinguish humans from other living beings. In other words, if one were to have a sharply defined answer to the question of what makes a human being human, this answer would also become the answer to a set of questions about newborns and animals. For instance, if one were to say, “One of the most important features that makes human beings human or that at least distinguish humans from other living beings is language and the ability to learn language,” this statement would essentially leads one to the assumption based on this that a newborn baby and a kitten as an example have not only developed but also not developed, due to development being considered learning or being able to learn a language, and as a result being able to communicate and think using language. The purpose of this paper is to question the fundamental assumptions and starting points such as for the aforementioned example of studies on consciousness (particularly in regard to newborns and animals), of language, and of philosophy and psychology in general and to offer criticisms and suggestions within the framework of the conception of transcendence as recently developed by Yalçın Koç (Theologia’nın Esasları [The Principles of Theologia]). Lastly, the study will address the relationship between having an experience and constructing a system of thought about having an experience in its broadest sense, as well as the possibility of making this a science. Within Koç’s framework of the conception of transcendence, a newborn baby is transcendent, whereas an adult individual is descendant. Following the birth of the transcendent, the psyche descends and narrows by passing through certain stages. Koç explains this descendance and narrowing according to some recent research in the field of developmental psychology as being essentially caused by the narrowing of cognitive faculties in the process of language learning.
Therefore, this study aims to point out the shortcomings of consciousness and language studies concerning newborns and animals by looking at Yalçın Koç’s (Theologia’nın Esasları [The Principles of Theologia]) understanding of the concepts of transcendent and transcendence. For instance, the fact that studies on consciousness concerning newborns and animals do not take into account factors such as transcendence, language, memory, and uniqueness of experience is a crucial shortcoming, regardless of the discipline from which they are approached. As has already been mentioned, the assumptions and starting points of consciousness studies have not been questioned sufficiently, and for this reason, intractable problems have led to new problems, especially since Descartes. In this case, this article must first open its starting points up to discussion and then carefully conduct the investigation using an interdisciplinary holistic approach. Koç’s books (Theologia’nın Esasları [The Principles of Theologia], 2008), (Theographia’nın Esasları [The Principles of Theographia], 2009) and (Theogonia’nın Esasları [The Principles of Theogonia], 2010)) are seminal in many fields due to how they focus on newborn babies being transcendent rather than descendent as in adult individuals, which is how most of the research has been done thus far. One can regard Koç’s books in general as an investigation into the question of what kind of a picture would emerge if transcendence were taken as the foundation. In one sense, this question can be applied to all of his books. For instance, his 2013 book on logic titled Nazari Mantık’ın Esasları [The Principles of Theoretical Logic] could be regarded as an investigation into the question of what kind of a picture of logic would emerge if one were to take the transcendent as the foundation. A similar case applies to Koç’s other books, such as his book on music (Nazari Musiki’nin Esasları [The Principles of Theoretical Music], 2011) or history (Tarih ve Nazariyat [History and Theoria], 2015). Therefore, Koç in short criticizes all the research that has been conducted on a descendent-based approach and presents a transcendent-based holistic and systematic approach.
