Faik

Lecturer

There is a growing consensus in philosophy of science that values play an ineliminable role in scientific reasoning. According to Douglas’ (2009) argument from inductive risk, when deciding whether to prioritize avoiding false negatives or false positives in accepting a hypothesis, scientists need to take into the account the social and ethical consequences of these errors. Biddle and Kukla (2017) have argued that epistemic risks exist not just in inductive inferences but also in the construction of scientific models, the operationalization of concepts for scientific research, and data characterization.The ineliminable role of values in science creates various problems for trust in science. As Wilholt (2013) observed, the cognitive division of labor requires scientists to trust other scientists. However, when each scientist makes these value choices themselves, it becomes difficult for scientists to rely on others and coordinate their research. Wilholt has suggested that methodological conventions help overcome this coordination problem by implicitly imposing a set of value choices on scientists. Irzık and Kurtulmus (2019) have drawn attention to the role values have in bringing about public trust in science. They observed that laypeople will have reasons to consider scientists’ value choices when laypeople need to make practical decisions based on science and when values have a bearing on one’s methodological choices in research.&nbsp;While Irzık and Kurtulmus (2019) and Willholt (2013) have discussed the relationship between the role of values in science and trust, they have not offered a normative account of how values should be managed to build public trust in science. This article discusses and evaluates three normative approaches that seek to provide foundations for public trust in science given the ineliminable role of values in science in light of these considerations.&nbsp;John’s (2015) high epistemic standards approach maintains that scientists should only share results with the public that are highly certain. This approach enables members of the public to rely on scientists without having to consider their values, since highly certain results would be of use to them whatever their values happen to be. This approach also helps scientists coordinate their research activities and not have to consider the values of the public when conducting their research. Despite its advantages, this approach has two shortcomings. First, it does not help with all kinds of epistemic risks. For instance, it cannot offer guidance on many of the value choices&nbsp;that need to be made in scientific modeling. Second, it can result in the underutilization of scientific findings when high epistemic standards are unattainable despite the science nevertheless being able to provide useful guidance to the public.According to Schroeder’s (2021) democratic values approach, scientific research should be shaped by the democratic values of a society as determined through democratic processes or surveys. This proposal overcomes both shortcomings of the high epistemic standards approach. It covers all forms of epistemic risk and can also help one make use of science in conditions of uncertainty. However, it has its own problems. The fact that democratic values can be different for each country would make international scientific collaboration more difficult. Given that democratic values can change, Schroeder’s approach also risks creating an intertemporal coordination problem for scientists who need to rely on past research. It also suffers from practical difficulties. Determining the democratic values that should guide scientific research and ensuring that scientists adhere to these values are far from straight forward. The help this approach offers laypeople is also limited. Even if citizens know that research has been conducted in line with democratic values, what this entails for their practical decisions is not easy to tell.Boulicault and Schroeder (2021) offer a hybrid approach that draws from Wilholt’s (2013) insights into the role of methodological conventions, John’s (2015) high epistemic standards approach, and Schroeder’s (2021) democratic values approach. In cases of low practical importance, the high epistemic standards approach should be used. In situations where scientific knowledge is widely accepted as being highly relevant for practical decisions, the democratic values approach should be used. In cases where research is of moderate practical importance or where disagreement exists about its practical importance, methodological conventions developed by scientist should be used.This hybrid approach aims to combine the advantages of all three while avoiding their disadvantages. However, given that the value of the high epistemic standards approach relies on its uniform application, it cannot do that. A second difficulty is that research in one category will employ research from others. Thus, keeping the value choices in the different categories isolated as required by this approach would also be impossible.Although this paper’s primary conclusion is predominantly negative (i.e., none of the examined approaches offer a comprehensive solution), its critical analysis has identified the key criteria a successful solution must fulfill. An effective solution should (a) be applicable by scientists and laypeople who will rely on their findings, (b) enable society to fully utilize available scientific knowledge, (c) address all types of epistemic risks, (d) be compatible with the social structure of science and its cognitive division of labor, and (e) remain incentive-compatible.

Bilimde Değerlerin Rolü Işığında Bilime Güven

Tolgahan

According to the principle of compositionality, the meaning of any expression is determined by the meaning of its parts. The principle is based on Gottlob Frege’s analysis of linguistic meaning in the function-argument structure.1 The principle has taken a central role in formal semantics with Richard Montague.2 , 3 The principle of compositionality states that a homomorphism exists between syntactic structure and semantic structure. Let A be a set of expressions and F a set of syntactic operations. Similarly, let B be a set of meanings and G be a set of semantic operations. The principle of compositionality states a homomorphism to exist between the syntactic algebra, , and the semantic algebra, . Therefore, the meaning of an expression that results from applying the syntactic operation4 Fγ on expressions α1 , …, αn is computed as follows:5Meaning (Fγ (α1 , …, αn )) = Gγ (meaning[α1 ), …, meaning(αn ))The proponents of the principle claim that compositionality is the key mechanism behind the systematic and productive structure of languages.6 , 7 Contrary to this view, Wlodek Zadrozny has argued that the compositionality principle does not contribute to the systematic structure of language.8 To justify his claim, Zadrozny put forward proof showing that any semantic structure can be encoded compositionally. Against Zadrozny’s claim is the claim that the obtained compositional semantics cannot preserve the synonymity in the original semantics. This study examines Zadrozny’s proof and answers the objection made over synonymy.In order to express Zadrozny’s proof, one first needs to construct an arbitrarily chosen semantic structure where: M = an arbitrary set of meaningsA = an arbitrary alphabet . = a binary operator S = a set closure of A under the operator (.) m = an arbitrary function from the set S to the set MZadrozny proposed the existence of a set M* and a unique μ function that is defined from S to M*, where μ has the following two properties:1. ∀s ∀t μ (s.t) = μ(s) (μ(t))2. ∀s μ(s) (s) = m(s)The first property shows that for any two expressions s and t, the meaning of their syntactic combination can be computed through these two expressions’ meanings. The meaning of the expression s.t is the function application of s to t. Therefore, μ is a compositional semantic function. The second property shows that the original meaning function m can never recovered. The proof shows that compositionality is a trivial principle. Therefore, compositionality does not make any contribution to the systematicity of languages.An important objection is found against Zadrozny’s claim, one that argues the μ function to be insufficient for encoding the original semantic structure. Therefore, although the μ function is a compositional one, the claim is made that it cannot encode the semantic structure of the original structure. The basis of this claim involves synonymity: Semantic structures that do not comply with the substitution principle cannot be encoded with the μ function.9 , 10, 11 One example of such a semantic structure is Frege’s referential semantics. According to referential semantics, the meanings of expressions are the objects to which they refer. For example, the expressions “the morning star is bright” and “the evening star is bright” refer to the same object:m(“the morning star is bright”) = m(“the evening star is bright”)&nbsp;However, when one of these two expressions replaces the other in any expression S, the object that S refers to may change.12&nbsp;S1 : According to John, the morning star is bright.S2 : According to John, the evening star is bright.Although the meanings of these expressions “the morning star is bright” and “the evening star is bright” are the same, the references of the expressions S1 and S2 may be different. As a result,&nbsp;the compositional semantics need to assign different values to the expressions “the morning star is bright” and “the evening star is bright.” As such, it does not capture the synonymy relation in the original semantics.This paper claims that this notion of synonymity is not a precise one but a pre-theoretical one. It does not need to be reflected in the lexical structure of the encoded semantics. What is expected from encoded semantics is to derive synonymity claims in the original semantics as theorems. In other words, what is expected is not the following identity:μ (“morning star is bright”) = μ (“evening star is bright”)Instead, what is expected is to represent the sameness of their meanings when they are used in extensional contexts.

Bileşimsellik İlkesinin Önemsizliği Üzerine

Hediye

This work focuses on the bourgeois public sphere, which is the field of political opinion and will formation. This study opens the boundaries of the bourgeois public sphere, which are not sensitive to gender equality, to critical discussion without abandoning the concept of the public sphere. The article discusses these boundaries and the political theoretical approaches to counter them under three headings. The first approach looks at inclusive participation versus genderspecific formal exclusion. Gender-specific formal exclusion derives from the social preconditions of equal participation in the bourgeois public sphere being constrained to male property owners. These social preconditions narrow the scope of equal participation. This narrowing of the political sphere prevents the normative principles of the bourgeois public sphere, which are formulated as openness to all, free access, equal participation, and free discourse, from being fully realized in practice. Expanding the narrowed political space is possible with an inclusive participation approach. As a matter of fact, inclusive participation supports the elimination of the formal exclusion that prevents equal participation in the public sphere and also supports the realization of the normative principles of the public sphere to a certain extent in practice.The second approach involves democratic public deliberation against gender-specific informal exclusions. One of the gender-specific informal exclusions is the bracketing of gender-based inequalities in public deliberation processes. This gender-specific informal exclusion takes place even when the bourgeois public sphere is not formally excluded. Therefore, equal participation in the public sphere cannot be reduced to the mere discussion of eliminating formal exclusion but also requires looking at public deliberation processes. This is because the bourgeois model of the public sphere brackets inequalities in the public deliberation processes, so everyone interacts discursively as if they were equals. In reality, however, these processes have unequal participants and work to marginalize women. Conversely, in order to enable some degree of gender-sensitive equal participation, the brackets around gender inequalities should be removed by thematizing and discussing these inequalities in public deliberation processes. In other words, the public sphere should be located in a social context that is undisturbed by unequal relations.Another gender-specific informal exclusion involves the lack of room for different communication styles in public deliberations apart from the rational communication style. The rational communication style may not always be sufficient for exploring the meanings of modern femininity. In order to uncover these meanings, room must be made alongside the rational communication style for non-rational communication styles, which involve multiple forms of everyday communication. Non-rational communication styles contribute to public deliberations in various ways. As one of these communication styles, storytelling is effective for reaching collective judgments by critically rebuilding memory and ensuring accountability. Storytelling is decisive in creating new themes of public interest and embodying justice, as well as facilitating the creation of better arguments and mutual understanding in public discussions. Storytelling connects some suffering with injustice, which is the subject of a more general discussion, and is effective in revealing social knowledge by playing a role in the mutual transfer and translation of experiences and values. It also contributes to a mutual learning that expands thinking. Another non-rational style of communication is rhetoric, which includes the emotional aspects of communication, figures of speech, and different use of symbols. Rhetoric and its impressive, formal, and concrete aspects make public communication more effective and increase mutual understanding and the power to persuade an audience. It helps participants appropriately and understandably communicate their claims and arguments to the audience.In addition to the positive aspects of non-rational communication styles, negative aspects also exist that can disrupt communicative interactions. These negative aspects are associated with strategic action. Strategic action involves people instrumentalizing others to serve their own ends. In strategic action, participants aim to influence those with whom they interact for their own purposes by resorting to methods such as manipulation, deception, pressure, bribery, threats, and coercion. In communicative action and opposite strategic action, participants consider those with whom they are interacting not as a means to their own ends but as the ends in and of themselves, namely as autonomous actors whose capacity to judge must be respected. Of course, this distinction between strategic action and communicative action does not entail giving up the positive aspects of the non-rational modes of communication. Instead, non-rational communication styles should be considered for their positive contribution to public deliberation while also excluding the aspects associated with strategic action.The third approach involves a reconceptualization of the public sphere as opposed to the neglect of the multiplicity of competing publics and inter-public relations. Alternative historiography reveals that the bourgeois model of the public sphere neglects the multiplicity of competing publics and inter-public relations. Alternative historiography also documents the existence of multiple informal publics and inter-public relations through examples that have shown the bourgeois public to not be the whole of the public and women to have different ways of accessing public life. These days, however, public relations are not limited to informal multi-public relations solely for forming opinions. Public relations also encompass formal public spheres that involve both the formation of public opinion and decision-making processes. Formal publics are accountable to informal publics and translate public opinion into laws, thereby increasing the power of public opinion.All three theoretical public approaches to the boundaries of the bourgeois public sphere contribute to the reformulation of equal participation in the public sphere from a gendersensitive perspective. Inclusive participation helps to eliminate gender-specific formal exclusion. Democratic public deliberation plays a role in overcoming gender-specific informal exclusions, and the reconceptualization of the public sphere requires considering the multiplicity of competing publics and inter-public relations.

Kamusal Alana Eşit Katılımın Toplumsal Cinsiyet Eşitliği Özelinde Tartışılması

Şilan

Res. Assist.

According to Karatani, Ionia in the 6th century BC had not only established an unprecedented culture but had also heralded the birth of philosophy and practiced an isonomic form of government without domination, one where equality was achieved through freedom. Athens, on the other hand, had a democracy based on nationalism and an unequal model of society. Karatani frames this radical comparison in his own theory of modes of exchange. He tries to read the philosophical relationship between Socrates and Plato by bringing Socrates closer to Ionian philosophy, which he argues represents isonomy, and Plato closer to Pythagoras, thus separating these two philosophers. He concludes that in order to get rid of democracy, Plato had sentenced his teacher Socrates to death. Karatani also finds the solution to defending the philosopher-king hypothesis to have been inspired by the Pythagoreans. However, difficulty is had in determining whether Pythagoras had been the source of Plato’s philosopher-king idea, given the historical record. Difficulty is also had in concluding Socrates to have embraced isonomy and Plato to have been alienated from the isonomic form of government. This is because isonomy meant many things in Athens’ political life, and Plato had even discussed isonomy in his texts. This shows that Plato had no discontent with the basic principles of isonomy. Plato’s concern with democracy stemmed not from his opposition to isonomy in any sense, such as equality before law, citizens acting publicly, the absence of a ruler, or constitutional principles. Plato’s concern instead was based on how he equated isonomy and democracy in terms of producing a radical lack of equality and form.The first section of this article will lay the groundwork for Karatani’s interpretation of isonomy using his own theory of modes of exchange and analyze the reasons for his special&nbsp;interest in Ionia and Socrates. The second section will examine how Ionia and Athens differed in distinguishing between democracy and isonomy. The third section will focus on the meanings of isonomy in some ancient Greek sources and argue Karatani’s isonomy to resolve economic tensions while emphasizing that the historical records he draws on risk turning into speculation by pointing to the need to return to the dialogue in the Republic, where Plato put forth the idea of the philosopher-king. The fourth section will show how Karatani’s strategy for cutting the philosophical link between Plato and Socrates brings Plato closer to Pythagoras and how Karatani as a result tries to understand isonomy and the idea of the philosopher-king through some speculative assumptions rather than through the dialogue in the Republic. One of these speculations involves Plato having acquired the idea of the philosopher-king from Pythagoras. In order to arrive at this conclusion, Karatani has had to rely on the idea of the historical Socrates, an idea that lacks a definitive conclusion. Karatani argues Pythagoras, not Socrates, to have been the source of Plato’s epistemology. By creating a sharp distinction between Plato and Socrates, Karatani removes the basis for considering whether Plato’s ideas on democracy as discussed in an epistemological-political framework are linked to Socrates. Even if one assumes that Karatani’s attempt to consider Plato at an intersection with Pythagoras is justified, the fifth section will argue this assumption to be invalid, given that Plato had actually discussed the isonomic form of government. The last section will attempt to conduct an investigation on Plato’s relevant dialogue in the Republic and suggest that Plato’s reading of democracy should be read not through an equality-freedom dichotomy but rather through a freedom-order dichotomy. In this respect, the study will argue Plato’s negative views on democracy to have instead stemmed from his opposition to the Solonian principle of eunomia (good order).

Antik Yunan Tarihinin “Sınırlarında”: Karatani ve İzonomi

Tonguç

This paper aims to examine epistemologically the noble lie, put forward how serious Plato was concerning the noble lie, and analyze whether the noble lie is sufficient and necessary for the creation of the Callipolis. In this respect, I argued that (i) the noble lie was devised to motivate the educate populace to become philosopher-rulers who work for the good of the Callipolis and its citizens and that (ii) Plato did not expect the noble lie to be sufficient at persuading either the philosopher-rulers or the rest of the citizens about the goodness or advantages of the government of the Callipolis. The noble lie has two basic components: (a) the genetic story (R. 414d1-414e5) and (b) the hierarchical story (R. 415b1-415c7).According to the genetic story, all citizens are earthborn brothers and sisters, and the life one assumes to be living is just some dreamlike state. The target of this claim involves the first generation of citizens, because later generations would no longer be first-degree relatives. Here, one needs to observe that persuading a child about their family and the rest of society being earthborn brothers and sisters is epistemologically different than convincing people that their life experiences are not real. In the latter case, people should accept that they cannot distinguish the real world from the dream world. This stresses the difficulty of persuading people about the noble lie, because they must acknowledge that cognitive apparatuses such as sense perception, memory, and imagination are neither secure nor reliableThe Hierarchical story claims that the souls of the citizens are made out of the distinct metal alloys of gold, silver, or a mix of bronze and iron. A gold citizen naturally belongs to the ruling class, a silver one to the assistants of rulers, and an admixture of iron and bronze to the class of craftsmen and farmers. This story is clearly in line with the tripartite theory of the soul and the classes of society discussed elsewhere in the Republic. In Book IV (436a-444e), Socrates argues that the human soul is divided into three parts (i.e., rational [λογιστικόν], appetitive [ἐπιθυμητικόν], and spirited [θυμοειδές]) and that these three parts correspond to the three classes of society (i.e., the rulers, the auxiliaries, and the farmers and craftsmen).For Socrates, two kinds of stories exist: true (ἀληθές) logoi and false (ψεῦδος) logoi. The false stories are muthoi [myths] (R. 377a4) and also involve two sorts of falsehoods: true falsehood&nbsp;(ἀληθῶς ψεῦδος) and not altogether pure falsehood (οὐ πάνυ ἄκρατον ψεῦδος (R. 382b7-c1). Both the gods and humans hate true falsehoods (R. 382c3-4). Although the gods hate the other type of falsehood, those with cognitive competence can use such lies as a drug and make them beneficial by having them approximate the truth as much as possible (ἀφομοιοῦντες τῷ ἀληθεῖ τὸ ψεῦδος ὅτι μάλισταR. 382c10-d3). Socrates presents “those ancient events involving the gods about which we don’t know the truth (R. 382d1-2)” as an example of not altogether pure falsehoods. Also, the noble lie involves that kind of a story and is not altogether a pure falsehood. Such falsehoods do not harm the soul because only imitate the true lies mirrored in the words (R. 382b9-10). Therefore, the philosopher-rulers’ souls are not harmed because they know the story they are telling to be a falsehood that will benefit the state as a result of their good intentions.Socrates defined the noble lie as a contrivance (R. 414b8, μηχανή). But what roles and meanings could this μηχανή have? The literal meaning of μηχανή is machine. Figuratively, it can also carry the meanings of a scheme or contrivance, as it is used in the famous phrase ἀπὸ μηχανῆς θεός [Deus ex machina]. In the Republic, Plato aims to convince people of the benefit and goodness of the Callipolis, yet he is aware that many will not easily accept his more rational arguments. In this case, Plato has a shortcut solution (i.e., μηχανή/device) up his sleeve: the noble lie. However, to think that Plato prefers rational arguments for persuading people about the Callipolis being the best kind of government would be a reasonable and just thought. In conclusion, Plato tries to convey a philosophical idea with the noble lie, as he often does. The caution that Socrates shows while discussing the noble lie is quite understandable because he may have felt embarrassed about using such a grand /blatant lie regarding the political structure of the Callipolis. In conclusion, the noble lie does not ensure the stable existence of the Callipolis; therefore, it may only be meant to play a small supporting role in explaining and achieving his political ideal.

Yalanlar, Hikayeler ve Argümanlar: Asil Yalansız Bir Kallipolis Mümkün Mü?

Zeynep

Aristotle’s Categories is widely accepted for positing a predication theory of being. He constructs his theory by assuming two fundamental ideas: being is said in many ways and being is always being something. Accordingly, he distinguishes substances from non-substances, as well as universals (eidē [species] and genē [genera]) from particulars. Therefore, the way substantial beings are differs from the way non-substantial beings are; with particulars being the essential instances of their species and genera within the same ontological categories. While non-substances are predicated of substances by accidental predication (being in a subject), universals are predicated of particulars by essential predication (being said-of a subject).Although Categories does not mention Plato or doctrine of Forms, this elaborated theory has been considered within the scholarly literature to reflect Aristotle’s anti-Platonic understanding of reality and to provide better answers to certain ontological problems that the theory of Forms (TF) fails at answering. As such, the charges in Categories that are deemed to address TF are as follows: TF cannot explain both the essential and accidental features of things. Moreover, it fails to answer how one thing can have many names, and is closely associated with the notion of bare substratum.In this paper, I defend that this philosophical exegesis can be explicitly read in a passage in Metaphysics1 in which Aristotle criticizes TF. When read in light of Alexander of Aphrodisias’ detailed commentary,2 the passage offers an exceptional opportunity to see how the ideas in Categories can be applied to a critique of TF, thus lending textual evidence to this scholarly reading within the contemporary literature.In this passage I refer to, Aristotle conceives the TF and propounds its deficiencies by assuming the predication theory in Categories: Although Platonists commit themselves to the existence of&nbsp;Forms of both substantial and non-substantial things, their very ideas and principles, together with the necessity of logic, preclude the existence of Forms of non-substances. If TF is true, then, there should only be essential participation (predication). Because Forms are substances, there should be substantial things only. Therefore, TF provides no account regarding the being of nonsubstances and thus contradicts itself. As a result, one can conclude that, unlike Categories and its elaborate explanation on this issue, TF is unable to explain how accidental beings are and, thereby, is bound to turn things into a bundle of substances (the question of how can one thing have many names).Subsequently, the passage in Metaphysics aims to show how TF also fails to account for the essence of things. Although TF limits itself to the existence of the Forms of substances only, it also fails to provide a persuasive relation between the two separate realms where Forms and particulars dwell. If things participate in Forms in an essential way, then the well-known thirdman problem occurs. Hence, if TF is true, things cannot possess essences. In other words, unlike the essential particulars (primary substances) of Categories, the participants in TF are merely contingent things. This conclusion supports the idea that TF is associated with the problematic notion of the bare substratum (the substratum theory of concrete particulars). Said another way and in light of this argument, TF is unable to provide an adequate justification for refusing the substratum theory that states concrete particulars to be the sum of a bare substratum and their extrinsic properties.The passage this study addresses suggests Aristotle’s conception of concrete particulars to have determined his critique of TF. His terminology and how he deals with the problems further support this impression. Alexander of Aphrodisias’ detailed arguments patently clarify that the two charges against TF in Metaphysics stem from the account in Categories. By analyzing this passage, I aim to contribute to the contemporary readings concerning the critical relationship between Plato’s TF and Aristotle’s Categories.

Aristoteles’in Kategoriler’i Formlar Teorisini Nasıl Eleştirir?

Ahmet

Determining the similarities and differences that occurred between Avicenna and Aristotle is an important study method in the literature on the history of philosophy. In this context, Avicenna can be examined both as an Aristotelian and as an original philosopher by considering his Kitāb al-Shifā [Book of Healing]. This is also true regarding Avicenna’s view of time. Recent research on time has argued Avicenna to have defined time as a magnitude rather than a number. In particular, many texts are found to argue that Avicenna had established the nature of time based on the concept of magnitude. However, the concept of number also held a central position in his understanding of time. Therefore, the claim that Avicenna had perceived time solely as a magnitude is a challenging one. As a result, the concepts of magnitude, measure, and number as existed in Avicenna’s understanding of time also need to be considered. Whether a hierarchical relationship exists between time as a magnitude and time as a number is also worth investigating.While Aristotle had tried to determine the nature of time through its relation to movement, he also sought ways to think of it in terms of units. Aristotle depicted the concepts of priority and posteriority to symbolize the continuity of movement. However, the use of the concept of numbers in the definition of time created the problem of discontinuity regarding categories. In this context, Avicenna’s way of constructing the concept of time can be interpreted as a restructuring by applying Aristotle’s arguments to different contexts in order to eliminate the discontinuity.Aristotle introduced the conceptualization of time as a continuously counted entity in order to resolve the problem of continuity for numbers with time. However, Avicenna did not include the idea that time is a number in the sense of being counted in his definition. now was the understanding of time in Avicenna’s philosophy built upon the concept of numbers. Avicenna is seen to have presented an ambivalent view of the concept of time, which he had based on the concepts of magnitude and numbers. According to the philosopher, however, the former is essential while the latter represents the accidental aspect of time. While numbers constitute one aspect of time, magnitude constitutes another more important aspect of time and is the cause of the qualities that time has.Avicenna made many different arrangements regarding the concept of time. The most important of these was the interpretation of Aristotle’s claim that there is no time when there is no soul counting through Avicenna’s use of celestial spheres and circular motion. Time performs the act of measurement through the continuity provided by cyclical motion. Therefore, time does not require a counting soul in order to exist. The celestial sphere that is the cause of the existence of time moves because of the soul, and that same soul is the perfection of the form of the celestial sphere. Although it does not have the same close causal relationship with the counting soul, the relationship Avicenna established between the soul and time can be understood in this manner.In Avicenna’s system, numbers are replaced by magnitude, thereby downplaying the emphasis that Aristotle and Hellenistic commentators had placed on time being a number in the sense of being counted. According to Avicenna, the attachment of a discontinuous quantity to a continuous quantity is bilaterally possible. In fact, time itself is continuous in terms of quantity. Consequently, motion encompasses both numbers and magnitude, both of which are referred to as time; however, numbers correspond to the accidental aspect of time, whereas magnitude denotes its quantity. The continuity of motion and time is ensured by celestial motion, thus enabling the measurement of other motions. Therefore, Avicenna’s interpretation of the concept of time aimed to explain that attaching illusory discontinuities such as month, year, and day to time does not make it inherently discontinuous. Therefore, this study has examined the claim that adding a discontinuity to time does not make time discontinuous.

İbn Sînâ’nın Aristotelesçi Zaman Kavramını Yorumlaması

Baran

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&nbsp;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.

Yalçın Koç’un Aşkınlık Anlayışı Çerçevesinde Yenidoğanlara ve Hayvanlara Dair Bilinç Çalışmalarındaki Eksiklikler: Aşkınlık, Dil ve Tecrübenin Biricikliği

Ekin

Elif

The cognitive aspect of metaphors has begun to be studied more systematically since the 20th century, with the conceptual metaphor theory put forward by Lakoff and Johnson1 being a turning point in this regard. While conceptual metaphor theory has been used in many disciplines for various purposes and approaches, the number of such studies in the field of classical philology is relatively limited. This theory places metaphors at the heart of humans’ meaning-making system and argues metaphors to be the product of a cognitive process preceding linguistic expression. In this respect, metaphors in all texts, including ancient texts, can be analyzed and interpreted within the framework of this theory.This study summarizes the conceptual metaphor theory along with its main problematics and analyzes certain subjective time metaphors in various Latin poems within the framework of this theory. The study generally aims to demonstrate how conceptual metaphor theory provides new and fruitful interpretative possibilities in Latin poetry criticism. On the other hand, the study also attempts to draw attention to certain similarities and differences regarding the basic functioning of metaphors by considering different types of poems and limiting the analysis to the concept of time. In so doing, the study questions the view that metaphors are only a matter of rhetoric within the limits of the field. In the attempt to demonstrate through examples of time metaphors selected from Latin poetry, the revised version of the conceptual metaphor theory is believed to be able to contribute significantly to the multifaceted reading of metaphors in ancient poetry.Time is a concept that has been studied by various disciplines, with countless models attempting to explain it. In this regard, although time cannot be reduced to a single definition, some of its features are clearly commonly understood by all. On the other hand, quite subjective descriptions and definitions of time also are found. To put differently, while humans have brought common definitions to time by dividing it into years, months, days, and other smaller common units and by&nbsp;measuring it with tools such as calendars and clocks, people also perceive time more individually and abstractly according to one’s own traits, living conditions, and experiences and express time subjectively.Due to time being an abstract concept that is relatively difficult to define, this article believes the metaphors of time in poetry can be explained more efficiently in the context of conceptual metaphor theory, which focuses on the relationship between the abstract and the concrete. Previous studies in this vein have generally analyzed metaphors of time in Latin in the general context of the language and culture2 and not specifically in the context of its poetic tradition. These studies have provided general frameworks for how time was perceived in Roman culture. For example, time was imagined as an entity moving toward a person, or as a space through which a person would move and travel by crossing a succession of points. Latin has both metaphors that reflect the idea of linear movement along the horizontal plane that are expressed by words meaning front/back (forward/ backward, etc.), as well as metaphors for movement in the vertical plane that are expressed as up/ down (high/low, above/below, etc.).On the other hand, the metaphors in poems provide a better basis for exploring the relationship between the cultural dimension of metaphors and their individual and literary aspects. Because presenting an exhaustive corpus that covers the entirety of Latin poetry is impossible due to the scale of the study, the paper will instead attempt to make a representative selection mainly from the Augustan poetry, as this will allow some insightful observations within the frame of conceptual metaphor theory about the way metaphors on the subjective perception of time were formed in these poems.For instance, although time seems to have two measures (e.g., sunset and sunrise, life and death) in some of Catullus’ verses, time is actually defined according to the presence or absence of his lover Lesbia. Unlike most who associate sunset with absence of light, sleep, despair, and death, sunset is for Catullus or his narrator the time to enjoy life because he meets Lesbia. Likewise, while sunrise is usually associated with light, wakefulness, hope, and life, it is the time when Lesbia leaves, thus meaning to him the opposites of these positive notions. In short, Catullus divided time into two sections: one that starts with meeting Lesbia, and the other that starts when she leaves. For the examples from Horace or his persona, time is an obstacle, because time is equated with getting old and is accompanied by death. The coming of death deprives man of many worldly pleasures. In contrast, the examples from Ovid emphasize the importance of time and opportunity, especially for the lover, and state that time flows differently for men and women. For men, time is a tangible entity that has to be observed, and one has to anticipate the right moment for each action. For women, time is a process in which a negative change (i.e., the loss of youth and beauty) occurs. The examples from Tibullus, on the other hand, do not refer to the past, and the future for Tibullus or his narrator will bring nothing but old age and ultimately death. Time flows rapidly and cannot be stopped, and humans have limited time to fall in love.

Kum Tanelerini Saymak: Latin Şiirinde Öznel Zaman Algısına Kavramsal Metafor Açısından Bakış

Cengiz

Prof.

MAKALE ÇAĞRISI

@JOURNAL_BOX_CURRENT

Rahime

In this study, the concept of virtue, which has a significant place in philosophy, especially in the field of ethics, is addressed within the context of Kantian ethics. To arrive at a better understanding of the concept of “virtue,” Kant’s universally valid framework will be examined. His definitions of virtue and duties of virtue and their connections with moral law, good, and happiness, which are the main determining concepts of Kantian ethics, are explained. This study examines Kant’s definitions of virtue, its relationship with moral law, and its place and importance in his theories. Kant defined “virtue” as the strength of a rational will to act according to one’s sense of duty. This strength stems from the moral law of practical rationality. To counter Kant’s argument, it can be said that humans are not just rational beings but have feelings, and virtuous acts are thus limited by individual dispositions and emotions. Therefore, humans can act virtuously, to the extent that they stand against their desires and dispositions. In other words, one can resist one’s own desires and inclinations through the moral strength of one’s own will. Therefore, virtue is the moral capability and perfection of a man. After analyzing the concept of virtue in Kantian ethics, it is evaluated from different perspectives. Considered objectively, virtue cannot be universalized or individually realized throughout one’s life, as Kant had proposed, because human beings are not only driven by pure reason, but also by feelings and impulses. However, this does not mean that complete virtue can never be attained universally. Considered subjectively, virtue is one’s determination to continually cultivate and develop moral maxims. Following the above arguments against Kantian virtue in relation to his concepts of the “highest good” will be explained as the result of virtue and happiness. The fact that the principle of virtue (moral principle) and the principle of happiness come from different sources does not mean that they are contradictory notions. According to Kant, the worthiness of being happy is a moral condition. Virtue refers to the worthiness of being happy. Therefore, virtue and happiness can help achieve the highest good. In the next section, the duties of virtue in Kantian ethics are investigated by scrutinizing Kant’s classification of these duties. Similar to Kant’s understanding of duty, the duties of virtue are divided into two groups: “duties to oneself” and “duties to others.” These duties are broadly about one’s own perfection and the happiness of others. The duties of “one’s own perfection” are “natural perfection” and “cultivation of morality.” The powers one has as potential for the realization of their natural perfection are the powers of the spirit, mind, and body. The “happiness of others,” which is the duty of virtue, consists of “natural welfare” and “moral well-being.” “Natural welfare” is based on benevolence andmoral well-being, which is a duty to others. This is a negative (limiting) duty. In other words, it is our duty to promote others’ happiness through moral well-being. The fundamental principle on which these duties are based is the intrinsic dignity of every human being. Kant elucidated these duties through examples. In conclusion, although the notion ofvirtue is not the basis of Kant’s ethics, further investigation shows that virtue has decisive importance in his theory ofethics. This study has presented the place and importance of virtue in Kantian ethics without categorizing it as either virtue ethics or not.

Yol Ayrımı mı, Yol Arkadaşlığı mı?: Kant Etiğinde Erdem Kavramı

Emrah

Assoc. Prof. Dr.

Heidegger viewed the history of philosophy as an account of a “natural” course of cognizing about being. Throughout the history of thought, philosophy has primarily been tasked with determining how being reveals its meaning. However, discrete periods of thought have overlooked the idea that the fundamental question of philosophy is to ask what being means; rather, philosophers have often questioned what being is. The latter form of the question represents a reduction that identifies being with singular entities: the most typical feature of such a reduction is the problem of substance. During the process of what Heidegger called the history of metaphysics, the problem of substance began to be inferred in the context of the conception of a dual world. This concept can be observed particularly in Plato’s thought but attained predominance with Descartes, the most important thinker of modern philosophy. In other words, the problem of being transformed into the mere problem of knowing and philosophy became a theoretical inquiry into the subject-object relationship. Consequently, how the subject relates to the external world and more importantly, how the being/existence of the external world can be proven become fundamental questions evoked from the epistemological subject-object relationship. According to Heidegger, such questioning indicates a departure from the original question, what is authentic in thought. Therefore, philosophy must decipher this approach that separates the subject and the object to re-establish a relationship with the authentic form of the question and reveal the meaning of existence. According to Heidegger, the true thought process begins with the asking of the real question, which reveals the unity of the subject and the object by deconstructing the subjectivity of the subject. The terms subject and object also become obsolete/null in such a context because they derive from the epistemological approach that enables the polar perspective. Da-sein, the focal concept of the Heideggerian approach, annulled the subject and the object. Da-sein marks human existence, indicating its essential feature as being-in-the-world, which indicates a unity that opens horizons of meaning by intertwining human being and beings. The concept of Da-sein has been used since Heidegger’s Being and Time and is positioned as the center of comprehending how being means by subjecting to the expansion of signification along the line of Heidegger’s thought. In this conception, to be human is to relate to existing phenomena in the context of certain interests: a fundamental concern related to one’s existence is evoked on the basis of such relations. Human beings bring objects into existence for themselves and accord them with meaning in the contexts of their most basic interests. However, Heidegger labels anxiety as the bedrock underlying all human interest. Concerns about the origins of their interests evoke in people the emotional state of fear about a definite object. Conversely, anxiety about their very existence places human beings in an emotional state induced by an uncertain object. In anxiety, a person encounters the nothingness of the individual’s existence; in other words, the person confronts mortality. Human beings are creatures without a place, originless, oscillating in nothingness because they are mortal. Therefore all human actions are designed to escape from the state of nothingness. Human beings are caught or lost while being-in-the-world. Therefore, instead of being omnipotent and capable subjects, human beings tend to be ejected from their own centers against their will. Heidegger accords particular importance to pre-Socratic thinkers in this context because these semipoet-thinkers could interpret the destructive human relationship with being by perceiving this overlooked feature of human existence. This approach reveals an individual as a tragic being vis-à-vis the person’s existence because human beings are not determiners in their relationship to being; rather, this association is characterized by unpredictability, which precisely manifests being-in-the-world. Humanity’s relation to things is not a relationship of knowing, and every relation constructed to reveal the truth of human connections with things concerns a relationship that shifts human beings from their positions and transcends knowability. Therefore, one’s orientation to objects should not be conceived as a relationship between mutually exclusive constituent elements. Human beings extend toward their individual deaths as they exist in-between birth and death; they realize their being during this period of extension between birth and death as they attempt to escape from their ultimate end. Put differently, human beings make the world what it is. The history of metaphysics viewed the human being as an animal rationale. In so doing, it missed this critical point and did not ask the essential question about the meaning of man’s being-in-the-world.

Heidegger’de Dış Dünyanın Varlığı Sorununun Çözümlemesi

@JOURNAL_BOX_EARLYVIEW

Muhsin

Bir Anlamlandırma Yordamı Olarak Sanat

Assist. Prof.

Doğal Dünyanın Logos’undan Estetik Dünyanın Logos’una: Cézanne’nın Dinleyen Gözleri

@JOURNAL_BOX_FEATURED

Güncel

İlişkisel Bir “Dünya” Olarak Sanat ve Nesnenin Yeni Estetik Deneyimde Bozulumu

Adnan

Bir Sanat Eseri Olarak Yaşamın Anlamı

@JOURNAL_BOX_MOSTREAD

Felsefe Arkivi – Archives of Philosophy, İstanbul Üniversitesi Edebiyat Fakültesi Felsefe Bölümü’nün 1945 yılından beri yayınladığı akademik dergisidir. Açık-erişimli, bilimsel ve hakemli bir dergi olarak yılda iki defa Haziran ve Aralık aylarında yayınlanır.

Felsefe Arkivi – Archives of Philosophy dergisinin amacı Türkçe, İngilizce, Almanca ve Fransızca özgün araştırma makalesi, çeviri metin ve kitap incelemesi yazıları yayınlayarak ve ulusal ve uluslararası düzeyde alanla ilgili bilginin paylaşımına katkıda bulunmaktır. 

Felsefe Arkivi – Archives of Philosophy felsefenin tüm alanlarına ilişkin konuları kapsar. Derginin hedef kitlesini akademisyenler, araştırmacılar, profesyoneller, öğrenciler ve ilgili mesleki, akademik kurum ve kuruluşlar oluşturur.

Derginin tüm giderleri İstanbul Üniversitesi tarafından karşılanmaktadır. Dergide makale yayını ve makale süreçlerinin yürütülmesi ücrete tabi değildir. Dergiye gönderilen ya da yayın için kabul edilen makaleler için işlemleme ücreti ya da gönderim ücreti alınmaz.

DOAJ

SOBIAD

The Philosopher’s Index

@METRIC_VOLUMES

@METRIC_ISSUES

@METRIC_ARTICLES

@METRIC_OPENACCESS

Felsefe Arkivi

@INFO_TAB_ABOUT

Editor in Chief

Co Editor in Chief

Editorial Management Board Member

Editorial Assistant

English Language Editor

Publicity Manager

Editorial Board Member

Advisory Board Member

@INFO_TAB_BOARDS

Felsefe Arkivi – Archives of Philosophy dergisinin amacı Türkçe, İngilizce, Almanca ve Fransızca özgün araştırma makalesi, çeviri metin ve kitap incelemesi yazıları yayınlayarak ve ulusal ve uluslararası düzeyde alanla ilgili bilginin paylaşımına katkıda bulunmaktır.  Felsefe Arkivi – Archives of Philosophy felsefenin tüm alanlarına ilişkin konuları kapsar. Derginin hedef kitlesini akademisyenler, araştırmacılar, profesyoneller, öğrenciler ve ilgili mesleki, akademik kurum ve kuruluşlar oluşturur.

Amaç ve Kapsam

DOAJSOBİADThe Philosopher’s Index

Dizinler

Dergi yayın etiğinde en yüksek standartlara bağlıdır ve <a href="https://publicationethics.org/" target="_blank">Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)</a>, <a href="https://doaj.org/apply/transparency/#principles-of-transparency-and-best-practice-in-scholarly-publishing" target="_blank">Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ)</a>, <a href="https://oaspa.org/" target="_blank">Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association (OASPA)</a> ve <a href="https://www.wame.org/" target="_blank">World Association of Medical Editors (WAME)</a> tarafından yayınlanan etik yayıncılık ilkelerini benimser; Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing başlığı altında ifade edilen ilkeler için: <a href="https://publicationethics.org/resources/guidelines-new/principles-transparency-and-best-practice-scholarly-publishing" target="_blank">https://publicationethics.org/resources/guidelines-new/principles-transparency-and-best-practice-scholarly-publishing</a> Gönderilen makaleler derginin amaç ve kapsamına uygun olmalıdır. Orijinal, yayınlanmamış ve başka bir dergide değerlendirme sürecinde olmayan, her bir yazar tarafından içeriği ve gönderimi onaylanmış yazılar değerlendirmeye kabul edilir. Makale yayınlanmak üzere Dergiye gönderildikten sonra yazarlardan hiçbirinin ismi, tüm yazarların yazılı izni olmadan yazar listesinden silinemez ve yeni bir isim yazar olarak eklenemez ve yazar sırası değiştirilemez.İntihal, duplikasyon, sahte yazarlık/inkar edilen yazarlık, araştrma/veri fabrikasyonu, makale dilimleme, dilimleyerek yayın, telif hakları ihlali ve çıkar çatışmasının gizlenmesi, etik dışı davranışlar olarak kabul edilir. Kabul edilen etik standartlara uygun olmayan tüm makaleler yayından çıkarılır. Buna yayından sonra tespit edilen olası kuraldışı, uygunsuzluklar içeren makaleler de dahildir.İntihal Ön kontrolden geçirilen makaleler, iThenticate yazılımı kullanılarak intihal için taranır. İntihal/kendi kendine intihal tespit edilirse yazarlar bilgilendirilir. Editörler, gerekli olması halinde makaleyi değerlendirme ya da üretim sürecinin çeşitli aşamalarında intihal kontrolüne tabi tutabilirler. Yüksek benzerlik oranları, bir makalenin kabul edilmeden önce ve hatta kabul edildikten sonra reddedilmesine neden olabilir. Makalenin türüne bağlı olarak, bunun oranın %15 veya %20'den az olması beklenir.Çift Kör Hakemlikİntihal kontrolünden sonra, uygun olan makaleler baş editör tarafından orijinallik, metodoloji, işlenen konunun önemi ve dergi kapsamı ile uyumluluğu açısından değerlendirilir. Editör, makalelerin adil bir şekilde çift taraflı kör hakemlikten geçmesini sağlar ve makale biçimsel esaslara uygun ise, gelen yazıyı yurtiçinden ve /veya yurtdışından en az iki hakemin değerlendirmesine sunar, hakemler gerek gördüğü takdirde yazıda istenen değişiklikler yazarlar tarafından yapıldıktan sonra yayınlanmasına onay verir.

Politikalar

Dergi açık erişimlidir ve derginin tüm içeriği okura ya da okurun dahil olduğu kuruma ücretsiz olarak sunulur. Okurlar, ticari amaç haricinde, yayıncı ya da yazardan izin almadan dergi makalelerinin tam metnini okuyabilir, indirebilir, kopyalayabilir, arayabilir ve link sağlayabilir. Bu <a href="https://www.budapestopenaccessinitiative.org/translations/turkish-translation" target="_blank">BOAI</a> açık erişim tanımıyla uyumludur. Derginin açık erişimli makaleleri Creative Commons Atıf-GayrıTicari 4.0 Uluslararası (<a href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/deed.tr" target="_blank">CC BY-NC 4.0</a>) olarak lisanslıdır.

Derginin tüm giderleri İstanbul Üniversitesi tarafından karşılanmaktadır. Dergide makale yayını ve makale süreçlerinin yürütülmesi ücrete tabi değildir. Dergiye gönderilen ya da yayın için kabul edilen makaleler için işlemleme ücreti ya da gönderim ücreti alınmaz.

Yazarlar dergide yayınlanan çalışmalarının telif hakkına sahiptirler ve çalışmaları  Creative Commons Atıf-GayrıTicari 4.0 Uluslararası (<a href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/deed.tr" target="_blank">CC BY-NC 4.0</a>) olarak lisanslıdır. CC BY-NC 4.0 lisansı, eserin ticari kullanım dışında her boyut ve formatta paylaşılmasına, kopyalanmasına, çoğaltılmasına ve orijinal esere uygun şekilde atıfta bulunmak kaydıyla yeniden düzenleme, dönüştürme ve eserin üzerine inşa etme dâhil adapte edilmesine izin verir.

Editörler, yayınlanan makalede, bulguları, yorumları ve sonuçları etkilemeyen küçük hatalar tespit edilirse düzeltme yayınlamayı düşünebilirler. Editörler, bulguları ve sonuçları geçersiz kılan büyük hatalar / ihlaller söz konusu olduğunda, makaleyi geri çekmeyi düşünmelidir. Yazarlar tarafından araştırma veya yayını kötüye kullanmaya yönelik olasılık söz konusu ise; bulguların güvenilir olmadığına ve yazarların kurumlarının olayı soruşturmadığına dair kanıtlar var veya olası soruşturma haksız veya sonuçsuz görünüyor ise, editörler endişe ifadesi yayınlamayı düşünmelidir. Düzeltme, geri çekme veya endişe ifadesi ile ilgili olarak <a href="https://publicationethics.org/resources/flowcharts/complete-set-english" target="_blank">COPE</a> ve <a href="https://www.icmje.org/recommendations/" target="_blank">ICJME</a> yönergeleri dikkate alınır.

Dergide yayınlanan tüm yazıların korunmasını ve kalıcı olarak erişilebilir olmasını sağlamak için makaleler, ulusal bir arşiv sitesi olarak hizmet veren ve aynı zamanda LOCKSS'in içeriği toplamasına, korumasına ve sunmasına izin veren Dergipark'ta saklanmaktadır.Ek olarak, yazarların kendilerinin makalelerinin son PDF sürümünü Open Archives Initiative (<a href="https://www.openarchives.org/" target="_blank">https://www.openarchives.org/</a>) standartlarına uygun açık elektronik arşivlerde arşivlemeleri önerilir. Yazarlar, yayınladıkları arşiv versiyonundan, İ.Ü. Yayınevinin dergi web sitesinin URL'sine bağlantı sağlamalıdır.

Felsefe Arkivi – Archives of Philosophy, yayın etiğinde en yüksek standartlara bağlıdır ve <a href="https://publicationethics.org/" target="_blank">Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)</a>, <a href="https://doaj.org/apply/transparency/#principles-of-transparency-and-best-practice-in-scholarly-publishing" target="_blank">Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ)</a>, <a href="https://oaspa.org/" target="_blank">Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association (OASPA)</a> ve <a href="https://www.wame.org/" target="_blank">World Association of Medical Editors (WAME)</a> tarafından yayınlanan etik yayıncılık ilkelerini benimser; Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing başlığı altında ifade edilen ilkeler için adres: <a href="https://publicationethics.org/resources/guidelines-new/principles-transparency-and-best-practice-scholarly-publishing" target="_blank">https://publicationethics.org/resources/guidelines-new/principles-transparency-and-best-practice-scholarly-publishing</a>Gönderilen tüm makaleler orijinal, yayınlanmamış ve başka bir dergide değerlendirme sürecinde olmamalıdır. Yazar makalenin orijinal olduğu, daha önce başka bir yerde yayınlanmadığı ve başka bir yerde, başka bir dilde yayınlanmak üzere değerlendirmede olmadığını beyan etmelidir. Uygulamadaki telif kanunları ve anlaşmaları gözetilmelidir. Telife bağlı materyaller (örneğin tablolar, şekiller veya büyük alıntılar) gerekli izin ve teşekkürle kullanılmalıdır. Başka yazarların, katkıda bulunanların çalışmaları ya da yararlanılan kaynaklar uygun biçimde kullanılmalı ve referanslarda belirtilmelidir.Her bir makale en az iki hakem tarafından çift kör değerlendirmeden geçirilir. İntihal, duplikasyon, sahte yazarlık/inkar edilen yazarlık, araştırma/veri fabrikasyonu, makale dilimleme, dilimleyerek yayın, telif hakları ihlali ve çıkar çatışmasının gizlenmesi, etik dışı davranışlar olarak kabul edilir.Kabul edilen etik standartlara uygun olmayan tüm makaleler yayından çıkarılır. Buna yayından sonra tespit edilen olası kuraldışı, uygunsuzluklar içeren makaleler de dahildir.

Etik

Felsefe Arkivi – Archives of Philosophy araştırma etiğinde en yüksek standartları gözetir ve aşağıda tanımlanan uluslararası araştırma etiği ilkelerini benimser. Makalelerin etik kurallara uygunluğu yazarların sorumluluğundadır.- Araştırmanın tasarlanması, tasarımın gözden geçirilmesi ve araştırmanın yürütülmesinde, bütünlük, kalite ve şeffaflık ilkeleri sağlanmalıdır.- Araştırma ekibi ve katılımcılar, araştırmanın amacı, yöntemleri ve öngörülen olası kullanımları; araştırmaya katılımın gerektirdikleri ve varsa riskleri hakkında tam olarak bilgilendirilmelidir.- Araştırma katılımcılarının sağladığı bilgilerin gizliliği ve yanıt verenlerin gizliliği sağlanmalıdır. Araştırma katılımcıların özerkliğini ve saygınlığını koruyacak şekilde tasarlanmalıdır.- Araştırma katılımcıları gönüllü olarak araştırmada yer almalı, herhangi bir zorlama altında olmamalıdırlar.- Katılımcıların zarar görmesinden kaçınılmalıdır. Araştırma, katılımcıları riske sokmayacak şekilde planlanmalıdır.- Araştırma bağımsızlığıyla ilgili açık ve net olunmalı; çıkar çatışması varsa belirtilmelidir.- İnsan denekler ile yapılan deneysel çalışmalarda, araştırmaya katılmaya karar veren katılımcıların yazılı bilgilendirilmiş onayı alınmalıdır. Çocukların ve vesayet altındakilerin veya tasdiklenmiş akıl hastalığı bulunanların yasal vasisinin onayı alınmalıdır.- Çalışma herhangi bir kurum ya da kuruluşta gerçekleştirilecekse bu kurum ya da kuruluştan çalışma yapılacağına dair onay alınmalıdır.- İnsan öğesi bulunan çalışmalarda, “yöntem” bölümünde katılımcılardan “bilgilendirilmiş onam” alındığının ve çalışmanın yapıldığı kurumdan etik kurul onayı alındığı belirtilmesi gerekir.

Makalelerin bilimsel ve etik kurallara uygunluğu yazarların sorumluluğundadır. Yazar makalenin orijinal olduğu, daha önce başka bir yerde yayınlanmadığı ve başka bir yerde, başka bir dilde yayınlanmak üzere değerlendirmede olmadığı konusunda teminat sağlamalıdır. Uygulamadaki telif kanunları ve anlaşmaları gözetilmelidir. Telife bağlı materyaller (örneğin tablolar, şekiller veya büyük alıntılar) gerekli izin ve teşekkürle kullanılmalıdır. Başka yazarların, katkıda bulunanların çalışmaları ya da yararlanılan kaynaklar uygun biçimde kullanılmalı ve referanslarda belirtilmelidir.Gönderilen makalede tüm yazarların akademik ve bilimsel olarak doğrudan katkısı olmalıdır, bu bağlamda “yazar” yayınlanan bir araştırmanın kavramsallaştırılmasına ve dizaynına, verilerin elde edilmesine, analizine ya da yorumlanmasına belirgin katkı yapan, yazının yazılması ya da bunun içerik açısından eleştirel biçimde gözden geçirilmesinde görev yapan birisi olarak görülür. Yazar olabilmenin diğer koşulları ise, makaledeki çalışmayı planlamak veya icra etmek ve / veya revize etmektir. Fon sağlanması, veri toplanması ya da araştırma grubunun genel süpervizyonu tek başına yazarlık hakkı kazandırmaz. Yazar olarak gösterilen tüm bireyler sayılan tüm ölçütleri karşılamalıdır ve yukarıdaki ölçütleri karşılayan her birey yazar olarak gösterilebilir. Yazarların isim sıralaması ortak verilen bir karar olmalıdır. Tüm yazarlar yazar sıralamasını <a href="https://cdn.istanbul.edu.tr/file/JTA6CLJ8T5/E44D323506324194A71D75C397A5352A" target="_blank">Telif Hakkı Anlaşması Formunda</a> imzalı olarak belirtmek zorundadırlar.Yazarlık için yeterli ölçütleri karşılamayan ancak çalışmaya katkısı olan tüm bireyler “teşekkür / bilgiler” kısmında sıralanmalıdır. Bunlara örnek olarak ise sadece teknik destek sağlayan, yazıma yardımcı olan ya da sadece genel bir destek sağlayan, finansal ve materyal desteği sunan kişiler verilebilir.Bütün yazarlar, araştırmanın sonuçlarını ya da bilimsel değerlendirmeyi etkileyebilme potansiyeli olan finansal ilişkiler, çıkar çatışması ve çıkar rekabetini beyan etmelidirler. Bir yazar kendi yayınlanmış yazısında belirgin bir hata ya da yanlışlık tespit ederse, bu yanlışlıklara ilişkin düzeltme ya da geri çekme için editör ile hemen temasa geçme ve işbirliği yapma sorumluluğunu taşır.

Baş editör, makaleleri, yazarların etnik kökeninden, cinsiyetinden, uyruğundan, dini inancından ve siyasi felsefesinden bağımsız olarak değerlendirirler. Yayına gönderilen makalelerin adil bir şekilde çift taraflı kör hakem değerlendirmesinden geçmelerini sağlar. Gönderilen makalelere ilişkin tüm bilginin, makale yayınlanana kadar gizli kalacağını garanti eder. Baş editör içerik ve yayının toplam kalitesinden sorumludur. Gereğinde hata sayfası yayınlamalı ya da düzeltme yapmalıdır. Baş editör; yazarlar, editörler ve hakemler arasında çıkar çatışmasına izin vermez. Hakem atama konusunda tam yetkiye sahiptir ve dergide yayınlanacak makalelerle ilgili nihai kararı vermekle yükümlüdür.Hakemler, araştırma, yazarlar ve/veya araştırmaya fon sağlayanlarla çıkar çatışması içinde olmamalıdır. Hakemler değerlendirmelerinin sonucunda tarafsız bir yargıya varmalıdırlar. Gönderilmiş yazılara ilişkin tüm bilginin gizli tutulmasını sağlamalı ve yazar tarafında herhangi bir telif hakkı ihlali ve intihal fark ederlerse editöre raporlamalıdırlar. Hakem, makale konusu hakkında kendini vasıflı hissetmiyor ya da zamanında geri dönüş sağlaması mümkün görünmüyorsa, editöre bu durumu bildirmeli ve hakem sürecine kendisini dahil etmemesini istemelidir.Değerlendirme sürecinde editör hakemlere gözden geçirme için gönderilen makalelerin, yazarların özel mülkü olduğunu ve bunun imtiyazlı bir iletişim olduğunu açıkça belirtir. Hakemler ve yayın kurulu üyeleri başka kişilerle makaleleri tartışamazlar. Hakemlerin kimliğinin gizli kalmasına özen gösterilmelidir. Bazı durumlarda editörün kararıyla, ilgili hakemlerin makaleye ait yorumları aynı makaleyi yorumlayan diğer hakemlere gönderilerek hakemlerin bu süreçte aydınlatılması sağlanabilir.

Daha önce yayınlanmamış ya da yayınlanmak üzere başka bir dergide halen değerlendirmede olmayan ve her bir yazar tarafından onaylanan makaleler değerlendirilmek üzere kabul edilir. Gönderilen ve ön kontrolü geçen makaleler iThenticate yazılımı kullanılarak intihal için taranır. İntihal kontrolünden sonra, uygun olan makaleler baş editör tarafından orijinallik, metodoloji, işlenen konunun önemi ve dergi kapsamı ile uyumluluğu açısından değerlendirilir.Seçilen makaleler en az iki ulusal/uluslararası hakeme çift taraflı kör hakemlik ile değerlendirmeye gönderilir; yayın kararı, hakemlerin talepleri doğrultusunda yazarların gerçekleştirdiği düzenlemelerin ve hakem sürecinin sonrasında baş editör tarafından verilir.

Hakemlik Hakkında

Baş editör, makaleleri, yazarların etnik kökeninden, cinsiyetinden, uyruğundan, dini inancından ve siyasi felsefesinden bağımsız olarak değerlendirirler. Yayına gönderilen makalelerin adil bir şekilde çift taraflı kör hakem değerlendirmesinden geçmelerini sağlar. Gönderilen makalelere ilişkin tüm bilginin, makale yayınlanana kadar gizli kalacağını garanti eder. Baş editör içerik ve yayının toplam kalitesinden sorumludur. Gereğinde hata sayfası yayınlamalı ya da düzeltme yapmalıdır. Baş editör; yazarlar, editörler ve hakemler arasında çıkar çatışmasına izin vermez. Hakem atama konusunda tam yetkiye sahiptir ve dergide yayınlanacak makalelerle ilgili nihai kararı vermekle yükümlüdür.Hakemler, araştırma, yazarlar ve/veya araştırmaya fon sağlayanlarla çıkar çatışması içinde olmamalıdır. Hakemler değerlendirmelerinin sonucunda tarafsız bir yargıya varmalıdırlar. Gönderilmiş yazılara ilişkin tüm bilginin gizli tutulmasını sağlamalı ve yazar tarafında herhangi bir telif hakkı ihlali ve intihal fark ederlerse editöre raporlamalıdırlar. Hakem, makale konusu hakkında kendini vasıflı hissetmiyor ya da zamanında geri dönüş sağlaması mümkün görünmüyorsa, editöre bu durumu bildirmeli ve hakem sürecine kendisini dahil etmemesini istemelidir.Değerlendirme sürecinde editör hakemlere gözden geçirme için gönderilen makalelerin, yazarların özel mülkü olduğunu ve bunun imtiyazlı bir iletişim olduğunu açıkça belirtir. Hakemler ve yayın kurulu üyeleri başka kişilerle makaleleri tartışamazlar. Hakemlerin kimliğinin gizli kalmasına özen gösterilmelidir. Bazı durumlarda editörün kararıyla, ilgili hakemlerin makaleye ait yorumları aynı makaleyi yorumlayan diğer hakemlere gönderilerek hakemlerin bu süreçte aydınlatılması sağlanabilir.

Daha önce yayınlanmamış ya da yayınlanmak üzere başka bir dergide halen değerlendirmede olmayan ve her bir yazar tarafından onaylanan makaleler değerlendirilmek üzere kabul edilir. Gönderilen ve ön kontrolü geçen makaleler iThenticate yazılımı kullanılarak intihal için taranır. İntihal kontrolünden sonra, uygun olan makaleler baş editör tarafından orijinallik, metodoloji, işlenen konunun önemi ve dergi kapsamı ile uyumluluğu açısından değerlendirilir. Editör, makaleleri, yazarların etnik kökeninden, cinsiyetinden, cinsel yöneliminden, uyruğundan, dini inancından ve siyasi felsefesinden bağımsız olarak değerlendirir. Yayına gönderilen makalelerin adil bir şekilde çift taraflı kör hakem değerlendirmesinden geçmelerini sağlar.Seçilen makaleler en az iki ulusal/uluslararası hakeme değerlendirmeye gönderilir; yayın kararı, hakemlerin talepleri doğrultusunda yazarların gerçekleştirdiği düzenlemelerin ve hakem sürecinin sonrasında baş editör tarafından verilir.Hakemlerin değerlendirmeleri objektif olmalıdır. Hakem süreci sırasında hakemlerin aşağıdaki hususları dikkate alarak değerlendirmelerini yapmaları beklenir.-Makale yeni ve önemli bir bilgi içeriyor mu?-Öz, makalenin içeriğini net ve düzgün bir şekilde tanımlıyor mu?-Yöntem bütünlüklü ve anlaşılır şekilde tanımlanmış mı?-Yapılan yorum ve varılan sonuçlar bulgularla kanıtlanıyor mu?-Alandaki diğer çalışmalara yeterli referans verilmiş mi?-Dil kalitesi yeterli mi?Hakemler, gönderilen makalelere ilişkin tüm bilginin, makale yayınlanana kadar gizli kalmasını sağlamalı ve yazar tarafında herhangi bir telif hakkı ihlali ve intihal fark ederlerse editöre raporlamalıdırlar. Hakem, makale konusu hakkında kendini vasıflı hissetmiyor ya da zamanında geri dönüş sağlaması mümkün görünmüyorsa, editöre bu durumu bildirmeli ve hakem sürecine kendisini dahil etmemesini istemelidir.Değerlendirme sürecinde editör hakemlere gözden geçirme için gönderilen makalelerin, yazarların özel mülkü olduğunu ve bunun imtiyazlı bir iletişim olduğunu açıkça belirtir. Hakemler ve yayın kurulu üyeleri başka kişilerle makaleleri tartışamazlar. Hakemlerin kimliğinin gizli kalmasına özen gösterilmelidir.

Dil Dergi Türkçe, İngilizce, Almanca ve Fransızca makale kabul eder.Yazıların Hazırlanması ve Yazım KurallarıAksi belirtilmedikçe gönderilen yazılarla ilgili tüm yazışmalar ilk yazarla yapılacaktır. Makale gönderimi online olarak erişilen <a href="https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/login" target="_blank">http://dergipark.gov.tr/login</a> üzerinden yapılmalıdır. Gönderilen yazılar, makale türünü belirten ve makaleyle ilgili detayları içeren (bkz: Son Kontrol Listesi) <a href="https://cdn.istanbul.edu.tr/file/JTA6CLJ8T5/326C5617571F4DC5AD714B16BC00FE8B" target="_blank">kapak sayfası</a>; editöre mektup, yazının elektronik formunu içeren Microsoft Word 2003 ve üzerindeki versiyonları ile yazılmış elektronik dosya ve tüm yazarların imzaladığı <a href="https://cdn.istanbul.edu.tr/file/JTA6CLJ8T5/E44D323506324194A71D75C397A5352A" target="_blank">Telif Hakkı Anlaşması Formu</a> eklenerek gönderilmelidir.1. Çalışmalar A4 boyutunda, 12 punto Times New Roman harf karakterleri ve 1,5 satır aralık ölçüsü ile iki yana yaslı olarak hazırlanmalıdır. Dipnotlar aynı sınırlar içerisinde kalınarak 10 punto ile yazılmalıdır.2. Çalışmaların başlıca şu unsurları içermesi gerekmektedir: makalenin yazıldığı dilde başlık, öz ve anahtar kelimeler; İngilizce başlık öz ve anahtar kelimeler; ana metin bölümleri, kaynaklar, tablolar ve şekiller.3. Giriş bölümünden önce çalışmanın kapsamını, amacını ve ulaşılan sonuçları belirten 200-250 kelime aralığında makalenin yazıldığı dilde, 200-250 kelime aralığında İngilizce özet yer almalıdır. Çalışmanın İngilizce başlığı İngilizce özetin üzerinde olmalıdır. Özetlerin altında çalışmanın içeriğini temsil eden, 5 adet makale dilinde, 5 adet İngilizce anahtar kelime yer almalıdır. Yazım dili İngilizce olmayan makalelerde -kısa İngilizce özetin dışında- 600-800 kelime aralığında İngilizce geniş özet bulunmalıdır.4. Araştırma makalesi bölümleri şu şekilde sıralanmalıdır: “Giriş”, “(en az iki) Metin Başlığı”, “Sonuç”, “Kaynaklar”.5. Yayınlanmak üzere gönderilen makaleyle birlikte yazar bilgilerini içeren kapak sayfası gönderilmelidir. Kapak sayfasında, makalenin başlığı, yazar veya yazarların bağlı bulundukları kurum ve unvanları, kendilerine ulaşılabilecek adresler, cep, iş ve faks numaraları, ORCID ve e-posta adresleri yer almalıdır (bkz. Son Kontrol Listesi).6. Dergide yayınlanan yazıların tüm sorumluluğu ve belirtilen görüşler yazarlara aittir; İstanbul Üniversitesi bir sorumluluk yüklenmez.7. Yayın kurulu ve hakem raporları doğrultusunda yazarlardan metin üzerinde bazı düzeltmeler yapmaları istenebilir.8. Dergiye gönderilen çalışmalar yayınlansın veya yayınlanmasın geri gönderilmez.

Yazım Kuralları

Derleme yazıları okuyucular için bir konudaki kaynaklara ulaşmayı kolaylaştıran bir araç olsa da, her zaman orijinal çalışmayı doğru olarak yansıtmaz. Bu yüzden mümkün olduğunca yazarlar orijinal çalışmaları kaynak göstermelidir. Öte yandan, bir konuda çok fazla sayıda orijinal çalışmanın kaynak gösterilmesi yer israfına neden olabilir. Birkaç anahtar orijinal çalışmanın kaynak gösterilmesi genelde uzun listelerle aynı işi görür. Ayrıca günümüzde kaynaklar elektronik versiyonlara eklenebilmekte ve okuyucular elektronik literatür taramalarıyla yayınlara kolaylıkla ulaşabilmektedir.Kabul edilmiş ancak henüz sayıya dahil edilmemiş makaleler Early View olarak yayınlanır. Genel bir kaynaktan elde edilemeyecek temel bir konu olmadıkça “kişisel iletişimlere” atıfta bulunulmamalıdır. Eğer atıfta bulunulursa parantez içinde iletişim kurulan kişinin adı ve iletişimin tarihi belirtilmelidir. Bilimsel makaleler için yazarlar bu kaynaktan yazılı izin ve iletişimin doğruluğunu gösterir belge almalıdır.Referans Stili ve FormatıMakaleler için kullanılacak referans sistemi “Chicago Manual of Style (CMOS) olmalıdır. Ayrıntılı bilgi için: <a href="https://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/tools_citationguide/citation-guide-1.html" target="_blank">https://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/tools_citationguide/citation-guide-1.html</a>Kaynakların doğruluğundan yazar(lar) sorumludur. Tüm kaynaklar metinde belirtilmelidir. Kaynaklar aşağıdaki örneklerdeki gibi gösterilmelidir.Örnekler:İR: İlk referans, SR: Sonraki referans, K: KaynakçaKitapİR Ayhan Bıçak, Tarih Felsefesinin Oluşumu (İstanbul: Dergâh Yayınları, 2004), 280.SR Bıçak, Tarih Felsefesinin Oluşumu, 25.K Bıçak, Ayhan. Tarih Felsefesinin Oluşumu. İstanbul: Dergâh Yayınları, 2004.İR J. J. C. Smart ve Bernard Williams, Utilitarianism. For and Against (Cambridge: Cambridge Press, 1973), 9.SR Smart ve Williams, Utilitarianism. For and Against, 82.K Smart, J. J. C. ve Williams, Bernard. Utilitarianism. For and Against. Cambridge: Cambridge Press, 1973.İR Stanley M. Honer, Thomas C. Hunt ve Dennis L. Okholm, Invitation to Philosophy. Issues and Options (Belmont: Wadsworth Pub Co., 1999), 20.SR Honer, Hunt ve Okholm, Invitation to Philosophy, 35.K Honer, Stanley M., Hunt, Thomas C. ve Okholm, Dennis L. Invitation to Philosophy. Issues and Options. Belmont: Wadsworth Pub Co., 1999.İR Frank Cunningham vd., Philosophy: The Big Questions (Toronto, Ontario: Canadian Scholars Press, 2003), 15.SR Cunningham vd., Philosophy, 30.K Cunningham, Frank, LaLonde, Daniel, Neelin, David ve Peglar, Kenneth. Philosophy: The Big Questions. Toronto, Ontario: Canadian Scholars Press, 2003.Soyadı taşımayan yazarlar (örn. Kung Fu Tse) kaynakçada ilk isminin baş harfi altında yazılır. Örneğin Kung Fu Tse, K harfinden kaynakçaya girmelidir. Soyadı almış yazarlar kaynakçaya soyadlarıyla girilir (örn. Popper, Karl).Çeviri KitapİR Nigel Warburton, Felsefe Okuma Rehberi, çev. Ahmet Fethi Yıldırım (İstanbul: Alfa, 2016), 8-9.SR Warburton, Felsefe Okuma Rehberi, 12.K Warburton, Nigel. Felsefe Okuma Rehberi. Çeviren Ahmet Fethi Yıldırım. İstanbul: Alfa, 2016.Hazırlayanı/Derleyeni/Editörü Olan Kitapta Kitap BölümüİR  Cengiz Çakmak, “Kader İnsanı Suçla Yargılar: ‘Kader ve Karakter’ Üzerine Değiniler”, Dar Kapıdaki Mesih: Walter Benjamin ve Politik Felsefesi içinde, Der. M .Ertan Kardeş (İstanbul: İthaki Yayınları, 2017), 79.SR Çakmak, “Kader İnsanı Suçla Yargılar: ‘Kader ve Karakter’ Üzerine Değiniler”, 83.K Çakmak, Cengiz. “Kader İnsanı Suçla Yargılar: ‘Kader ve Karakter’ Üzerine Değiniler.” Dar Kapıdaki Mesih: Walter Benjamin ve Politik Felsefesi. Derleyen M .Ertan Kardeş, 79-87. İstanbul: İthaki Yayınları, 2017.Kitap İçindeki Önsöz, Sunuş, Giriş vb. KısımlarİR Hakkı Hünler ve Solmaz Zelyüt Hünler, Alasdair MacIntyre’ın Ethik’in Kısa Tarihi adlı kitabına sunuş (İstanbul: Paradigma Yayınları, 2001), XVII.SR Hünler ve Zelyüt Hünler, sunuş, XVI.K Hünler, Hakkı ve Zelyüt Hünler, Solmaz. Alasdair MacIntyre’ın Ethik’in Kısa Tarihi adlı kitabına sunuş, I-XXIV. İstanbul: Paradigma Yayınları, 2001.Elektronik Olarak Yayımlanmış KitapİR Benedict de Spinoza, The Ethics [Part I] Erişim 2 Temmuz 2019, http://www.gutenberg.org/9/1/919/, 1.E.2.SR Spinoza, The Ethics [Part I], 1.E.9.K Spinoza, Benedict de. The Ethics [Part I]. Erişim 2 Temmuz 2019. http://www.gutenberg.org/9/1/919/.Online başvurulmuş kitaplar için URL ya da veritabanının adı verilir. Eğer sayfa numarası yoksa, bölüm ya da kısım başlığı referans verilebilir.Telif Dergi MakalesiİR Cengiz Çakmak, “Asadan Böceğe: Politik Yargı ve Felsefe,” Felsefe Arkivi 43 (2015), 17.SR Çakmak, “Asadan Böceğe,” 17-18.K Çakmak, Cengiz. “Asadan Böceğe: Politik Yargı ve Felsefe.” Felsefe Arkivi 43 (2015): 17-23.Çeviri Dergi MakalesiİR Reinhard Kleinknecht, “Olay ve Gerçeklik Zamanı,” çev. M. S. Genç, Kutadgubilig Felsefe-Bilim Araştırmaları Dergisi 11 (2007), 20.SR Reinhard, Kleinknecht, “Olay ve Gerçeklik Zamanı,” 22.K Kleinknecht, Reinhard. “Olay ve Gerçeklik Zamanı.” Çeviren M. S. Genç. Kutadgubilig Felsefe-Bilim Araştırmaları Dergisi 11 (2007): 17-44.Elektronik Dergi MakalesiİR Ahmet Emre Dağtaşoğlu, “Antik Yunan Felsefesinde “Fantasia”nın Epistemolojik Rolü,” flsf (Felsefe ve Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi) 17 (2014 Bahar): 266. Erişim 24 Haziran 2019.SR Dağtaşoğlu, “Antik Yunan Felsefesinde,” 266-268.K Dağtaşoğlu, Ahmet Emre. “Antik Yunan Felsefesinde “Fantasia”nın Epistemolojik Rolü.” flsf (Felsefe ve Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi) 17 (2014 Bahar): 266-287. Erişim 24 Haziran 2019.Online başvurulmuş makaleler için URL ya da veritabanının adı verilir. Eğer mevcutsa DOI (Digital Object Identifier) numarasını belirtin.TezİR Ali Suat Gözcü, “Zaman Sorunu: Şimdici ve Ebediyetçi Anlayışları”, (Doktora tezi, İstanbul Üniversitesi, 2016), 28.SR Gözcü, “Zaman Sorunu: Şimdici ve Ebediyetçi Anlayışları”, 40.K Gözcü, Ali Suat. “Zaman Sorunu: Şimdici ve Ebediyetçi Anlayışları.” Doktora tezi, İstanbul Üniversitesi, 2016.Ansiklopedi MaddesiİR Ahmet Cevizci, “Mutluluk,” Felsefe Sözlüğü, (İstanbul: Paradigma Yayınları, 2010), 1130.SR Cevizci, “Mutluluk,” 1131.K Cevizci, Ahmet. “Mutluluk.” Felsefe Sözlüğü: 1130-1131. İstanbul: Paradigma Yayınları, 2010.Kitap TanıtımıİR Aruz İbişi Temelli, “Siyaset Felsefesi,” Kutadgubilig. Felsefe-Bilim Araştırmaları, 29 (2016), 370.SR İbişi Temelli, “Siyaset Felsefesi,” 371.K İbişi Temelli, Arzu. “Siyaset Felsefesi.” Kutadgubilig. Felsefe-Bilim Araştırmaları, 29 (2016): 369-374.Web SitesiİR Carl Tollef Solberg ve Espen Gamlund, “How Should We Evaluate Deaths?,” Practical Ethics, erişim 03 Temmuz 2019, http://blog.practicalethics.ox.ac.uk/2019/05/guest-post-how-should-we-evaluate-deaths/SR “How Should We Evaluate Deaths?”K Solberg, Carl Tollef ve Gamlund, Espen. “How Should We Evaluate Deaths?” Practical Ethics. Erişim 03 Temmuz 2019, http://blog.practicalethics.ox.ac.uk/2019/05/guest-post-how-should-we-evaluate-deaths/Basılı Gazete MakalesiİR Takiyettin Mengüşoğlu, “Eğitimde Tarihi Çevre ve İnsan,” Cumhuriyet, 14 Aralık 1971, 2.SR Mengüşoğlu, “Eğitimde Tarihi Çevre ve İnsan,” 2.K Mengüşoğlu, Takiyettin. “Eğitimde Tarihi Çevre ve İnsan.” Cumhuriyet, 14 Aralık 1971.Elektronik Gazete HaberiİR “What Consent? Hungary, Poland &amp; Czech Republic Deny Sealing Migrant Deal with Merkel”, Russia Today, 30.06.2018, erişim 30.06.2018). https://www.rt.com/news/431382-hungary-poland-czech-migrants/SR “What Consent?”K “What Consent? Hungary, Poland &amp; Czech Republic Deny Sealing Migrant Deal with Merkel”, Russia Today, 30.06.2018, erişim 30.06.2018). <a href="https://www.rt.com/news/431382-hungary-poland-czech-migrants/" target="_blank">https://www.rt.com/news/431382-hungary-poland-czech-migrants/</a>

<a href="https://cdn.istanbul.edu.tr/file/JTA6CLJ8T5/E44D323506324194A71D75C397A5352A" target="_blank">Telif Hakkı Anlaşması Formu</a><a href="https://cdn.istanbul.edu.tr/file/JTA6CLJ8T5/326C5617571F4DC5AD714B16BC00FE8B" target="_blank">Kapak sayfası</a><a href="https://cdn.istanbul.edu.tr/file/JTA6CLJ8T5/5D842860AD2549CA8827F2BE7FDFA160" target="_blank">Yazar Formu</a>

Aşağıdaki listede eksik olmadığından emin olun: ● Editöre mektup<ul><li>Makalenin türü</li><li>Başka bir dergiye gönderilmemiş olduğu bilgisi</li><li>Sponsor veya ticari bir firma ile ilişkisi (varsa belirtiniz)</li><li>Kaynakların Chicago Manual of Style’a göre belirtildiği</li><li>İngilizce yönünden kontrolünün yapıldığı</li><li>Yazarlara Bilgide detaylı olarak anlatılan dergi politikalarının gözden geçirildiği</li></ul><a href="https://cdn.istanbul.edu.tr/file/JTA6CLJ8T5/E44D323506324194A71D75C397A5352A" target="_blank">Telif Hakkı Anlaşması Formu</a>● Daha önce basılmış materyal (yazı-resim-tablo) kullanılmış ise izin belgesi● <a href="https://cdn.istanbul.edu.tr/file/JTA6CLJ8T5/58AC6DC3538B442E88B663120D3D2478" target="_blank">Kapak sayfası</a><ul><li>Makalenin kategorisi</li><li>Türkçe ve İngilizce başlık</li><li>Yazarların ismi soyadı, unvanları ve bağlı oldukları kurumlar (üniversite ve fakülte bilgisinden sonra şehir ve ülke bilgisi de yer almalıdır), e-posta adresleri</li><li>Sorumlu yazarın e-posta adresi, açık yazışma adresi, iş telefonu, GSM, faks nosu</li><li>Tüm yazarların ORCID’leri</li></ul>● Makale ana metni<ul><li>Türkçe ve İngilizce başlık</li><li>Özetler: 250 kelime Türkçe, 250 kelime İngilizce ve 600-800 kelimelik İngilizce geniş özet</li><li>Anahtar Kelimeler: 5-10 adet Türkçe ve 5-10 adet İngilizce</li><li>Makale ana metin bölümleri</li><li>Çıkar çatışması (varsa belirtiniz)</li><li>Finansal destek (varsa belirtiniz)</li><li>Teşekkür (varsa belirtiniz)</li><li>Son notlar (varsa belirtiniz)</li><li>Kaynaklar</li><li>Tablolar-Resimler, Şekiller (başlık, tanım ve alt yazılarıyla)</li></ul>

Sayı Türü	Regular
Editör(ler)	Cengiz Çakmak
Kapak (PDF)
Ön Sayfalar (PDF)