Hemem Ramadani and proud positiveists

Fenomen “Andem Ramadani” is a symptom of the predimatic vacuum and the spiritual and conceptual crisis that the Western world of science and philosophy has long engulfed. Hetem is only the Albanian face of the result that produces the manifestation of this crisis and this vacuum. Hetem himself is correct in saying that there is a lack of concepts and a lack of paradigm. This statement also gives him the legitimate right to climb to stage as representative of another alternative in the field in which he claims to have knowledge and knowledge.

It is another matter, then, that it deepens even more toward epistemic and metaphysic darkness. Hetem makes his nonconventional approach to certain problems attractive and creative, but makes him laugh and lists him with the charlatan caravan his Donocotistic attempt and overconfidence on the alleged cognitive and scientific potential.

Hemem Ramadan's naive and ill-mannered law on the lames of modern science and medicine is presented in its most sophisticated form in the academic world of science and contemporary philosophy through the works of postmodern authors. These authors have long declared knowledge and knowledge to be an justified form of faith. In its simplest sense, this means that the whole conceptual and methodological machine that enables us to build what we call knowledge simply means a whole range of human mechanisms to legitimize a deep, human faith. I knew, then, that it is but an effective tool to legitimize our beliefs and beliefs.

Knowledge - whether scientific, artistic, philosophical, or religious - has a human, deeply human nature. Man's knowledge of nature and reality is knowledge and recognition according to the human heels of nature and reality. The mind and the reason, since they are human, are limited and shallow in the knowledge and meaning of nature and reality. The mind, it would mean Rory, is not an exact mirror that reflects the outside world as it is in itself.

So today's conflict in various fields of knowledge should be a conflict of interpretations, legislations and methodologies, not war for self-declared as the ultimate moral and cognitive and epistemic institutions, and to monopolise the exclusive right to know, explain and treat the world, nature, reality, man and so on.