29
countries, and property damages. More controversially; some interpretations of the Bible either were not progressive. The prooves are, for example the death of an ancient philosopher Hypatia, great fire of the Library of Alexandria in the 415 AD, witch hunt or original aim of crusades [ 4 ].
In relation with what was said above, I am exposing that this statement is not generally valid.
Imaginings is a bit more complicated notion. Certain civic education textbook offers this definition:,, Imaginings are copies of sensations already percieved by our senses " [ 5 ]. This definition is inaccurate because it does not explain the option of creating new object out of these sensations. For me, this one is more convenient: Imaginings are representational states of mind entertained by a thinker without him being committed to its truth [ 6 ].
I could have gone deeper into for example interconnection between imaginings and memory, synesthesia, aphantasy etc. But I do not want to instrumentalize imaginings too much nor to be accused of thinking for thinking. However imaginings, anyhow abstract, have very serious consequences. For example in question what is good: a trader who wants to change society by using market will have different view of morality than e. g. monk in a monastery. Futhermore, we use our imaginings everyday even unconsciously. In one of his lectures Slavoj Žižek claims:
,, Like, I talk to you: of course rationally I know you are defecating, you are sweating, not to mention other things, but quite literally, when I interact with you this is not part of the image I have of you. So, when I deal with you, I am basically not dealing with the real of you. I am dealing with the virtual image of you. And this image has reality, in the sense that it, none of the less, structures the way I am dealing with you " [ 7 ].
This information will not make you a milionare, but it certainly has power to change your view of existence.
In my opinion the way to new often leads through old. That might be why I like going to archives. Once I found a model titled Sandpit in there [ 8 ]. It is an amazing alegory to human existence and creativity. Author also hyperbolizes certain basis. I really appreciate that. I am sure that the platosocratic tradition will agree even when I use Nietzsche ' s words:,,(...) And alas for every living thing that would live without dispute about weight and scales and weigher!" [ 9 ].
I will update this model a bit:
Children are able to use their hands when playing with sand. They have been writing commonly accessible manuals about various techniques. But then a builder refused to show his technique to the others. By doing this he committed epistemic injustice: if we take sand as our collective imaginings or in other words values which is implied there. Epistemic injustice occours when someone is banned from adding or borrowing knowledge from our,, collective pool of knowledge " [ 10 ]. And that is what I am afraid of. Why?
If there is not adequate education, there is no democracy; thus,, borrowing from " and broadening our,, pool of knowledge " in every field. If there is no democracy, there are no human rights. If there are no human rights, dialoque is replaced by tyrany.
29