{"id":51799,"date":"2021-09-17T08:02:55","date_gmt":"2021-09-17T05:02:55","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/bilimvegelecek.com.tr\/?p=51799"},"modified":"2021-09-16T14:19:48","modified_gmt":"2021-09-16T11:19:48","slug":"gulmenin-farkli-yuzleri-2","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/bilimvegelecek.com.tr\/index.php\/2021\/09\/17\/gulmenin-farkli-yuzleri-2","title":{"rendered":"G\u00fclmenin farkl\u0131 y\u00fczleri"},"content":{"rendered":"

Plessner\u2019e g\u00f6re g\u00fclmede, beden bir anl\u0131\u011f\u0131na zihnin boyunduru\u011fundan kurtulur. Bunu ba\u015farabilmesinin nedeni, zihnin g\u00fclme an\u0131ndan hemen \u00f6nceki durumla kolay kolay ba\u015f edememesidir. G\u00fclmeye ili\u015fkin karma\u015f\u0131k durumlar, her zaman zihnin yan\u0131t verebilece\u011fi durumlar de\u011fildir. Burada yan\u0131t\u0131 beden vermektedir, durumun karma\u015f\u0131kl\u0131\u011f\u0131na verdi\u011fi tepkiyle, deyim yerindeyse zihni rahatlatmaktad\u0131r. Bir yandan da zihnin ba\u011flar\u0131ndan kurtuldu\u011fundan bir an i\u00e7in \u00f6zg\u00fcrle\u015fmektedir.<\/em><\/p>\n

Kendili\u011finden anla\u015f\u0131lan bir kavram gibi g\u00f6r\u00fcnen g\u00fclme \u00fczerine d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fcr d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnmez insan\u0131n kafas\u0131 kar\u0131\u015f\u0131r. \u00d6rne\u011fin akla hemen \u015f\u00f6yle sorular gelebilir: G\u00fclme, \u00f6znel bir davran\u0131\u015f m\u0131d\u0131r? G\u00fclmeyi \u00f6znel bir davran\u0131\u015f olarak ele al\u0131rsak, g\u00fclmenin nesnesi nedir ve bu nesne her zaman belirli bir nesne midir? G\u00fclme, insan iradesiyle mi olur yoksa irade d\u0131\u015f\u0131 m\u0131? \u015eu sayaca\u011f\u0131m g\u00fclmelerin hepsini ayn\u0131 g\u00fclme davran\u0131\u015f\u0131n\u0131n alt\u0131nda toplayabilir miyim? \u00c7ocu\u011fun g\u00fcl\u00fc\u015f\u00fc, k\u00f6t\u00fc adam g\u00fcl\u00fc\u015f\u00fc, d\u00fc\u015fene g\u00fclme, g\u0131d\u0131klanmaya g\u00fclme, sevin\u00e7ten g\u00fclme, korkudan g\u00fclme, ac\u0131 ac\u0131 g\u00fclme, a\u011flarken g\u00fclme, espriye g\u00fclme\u2026 Yan\u0131t hay\u0131rsa, yani bu g\u00fclme etkinliklerini birbirinden ay\u0131rmam gerekiyorsa, g\u00fclmeyi tek bir teori alt\u0131nda \u00f6zetleyebilir miyim?<\/p>\n

G\u00fclme konusu, kavram\u0131n apa\u00e7\u0131k gibi g\u00f6r\u00fcnmesine kar\u015f\u0131n, i\u00e7ine girildik\u00e7e zorla\u015f\u0131yor. Her \u015feyden \u00f6nce, g\u00fclme toplumsal ve hatta teknolojik bak\u0131mdan evrimle\u015fen bir kavram gibi. \u00d6rne\u011fin antik \u00e7a\u011fda g\u00fclme ile dizilerin arka plan\u0131ndaki g\u00fclme efektini tarihsel-toplumsal ba\u011flam\u0131 d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnmeden ele almak olanakl\u0131 de\u011fil. Bu nedenle bu devasa konuyu, burada ancak belli ba\u015fl\u0131 teorilere de\u011finerek ele alarak, g\u00fclme kavram\u0131n\u0131n evrimine giri\u015f niteli\u011finde bir bak\u0131\u015f atmak istiyorum.<\/p>\n

Antik g\u00fcl\u00fc\u015f<\/strong>
\nFelsefe tarihinde g\u00fclmenin genellikle olumsuz bir \u015f\u00f6hreti vard\u0131r. G\u00fclme genellikle bir ara\u015ft\u0131rma konusu olarak g\u00f6r\u00fclmemi\u015f, s\u00f6z\u00fc edildi\u011finde de insan\u0131n soylu yap\u0131s\u0131na \u00e7ok da uymayan bir \u00f6zellik olarak nitelendirilmi\u015ftir. Yine de bu, g\u00fclmenin son derece g\u00fc\u00e7l\u00fc bir imge olmas\u0131n\u0131 de\u011fi\u015ftirmemi\u015ftir. Hem \u0130lyada hem Odysseia\u2019da, g\u00fclme ayn\u0131 zamanda bir g\u00fc\u00e7 g\u00f6sterisidir. Asbestos gelos, ya da ate\u015fe dayan\u0131kl\u0131 g\u00fcl\u00fc\u015f, bitmeyen kahkaha, yenilmez g\u00fcl\u00fc\u015f ya da her t\u00fcrl\u00fc tehlikeye ve korkuya ra\u011fmen g\u00fclmek anlamlar\u0131na gelebilir. Homeros\u2019un kulland\u0131\u011f\u0131 bir ifadedir, bu nedenle Homeros g\u00fcl\u00fc\u015f\u00fc olarak da ge\u00e7er. Odysseus\u2019un Tepeg\u00f6z Polyphemus\u2019la giri\u015fti\u011fi m\u00fccadeleden sonraki kahkahas\u0131n\u0131 hat\u0131rlayabiliriz. Ya da hor g\u00f6r\u00fclm\u00fc\u015f, itilip kak\u0131lm\u0131\u015f demirci ustas\u0131 Hephaistos\u2019a g\u00fclen tanr\u0131lar\u0131n kahkahas\u0131n\u0131. Ancak e\u011fer hat\u0131rlarsak, ayn\u0131 Hephaistos, kar\u0131s\u0131 Aphrodite\u2019yi Ares\u2019le yatakta basmak \u00fczere kurdu\u011fu d\u00fczenek i\u015fe yaray\u0131nca, \u201cson g\u00fclen iyi g\u00fcler\u201d deyimini somutla\u015ft\u0131rm\u0131\u015ft\u0131.<\/p>\n

Asbestos gelos, g\u00fclmenin trajik karakterinin bir ifadesidir. G\u00fclme davran\u0131\u015f\u0131n\u0131n intikam, \u00f6fke, h\u00fcz\u00fcn, k\u0131skan\u00e7l\u0131k gibi duygularla nas\u0131l i\u00e7 i\u00e7e oldu\u011funun bir kan\u0131t\u0131d\u0131r. Yine de esas trajedi, bir t\u00fcr duygular karma\u015fas\u0131 de\u011fildir. Tanr\u0131lar\u0131n kahkahas\u0131 olarak asbestos gelos, k\u0131saca \u015funu s\u00f6yler: \u201cSon s\u00f6z her zaman yazg\u0131n\u0131nd\u0131r.\u201d Yani t\u00fcm g\u00fcndelik hislerimiz, eylemlerimiz, gitgellerimiz ve \u00e7eki\u015fmelerimiz her zaman daha b\u00fcy\u00fck bir olay \u00f6rg\u00fcs\u00fcne aittir; hi\u00e7birinin kendi ba\u015f\u0131na mutlak bir de\u011feri yoktur ve kontrol hi\u00e7bir zaman tam anlam\u0131yla bireyin elinde de\u011fildir. Hemen hemen b\u00fct\u00fcn mitolojik \u00f6yk\u00fcler bize bunu s\u00f6ylemeye \u00e7al\u0131\u015fmaktad\u0131r. Kaderin bu yasas\u0131n\u0131 \u00e7i\u011fnemeye \u00e7al\u0131\u015fan Oidipus gibilerse, hepimizin bildi\u011fi gibi akla hayale gelmeyecek k\u00f6t\u00fcl\u00fcklerle cezaland\u0131r\u0131l\u0131r. Tanr\u0131lar yery\u00fcz\u00fcnden g\u00f6ky\u00fcz\u00fcne do\u011fru \u00e7ekildik\u00e7e, insan\u0131n etkinli\u011fi artt\u0131k\u00e7a ve yery\u00fcz\u00fcn\u00fc \u015fekillendirmeye ba\u015flad\u0131k\u00e7a, yani insan kendi etkinli\u011finin yans\u0131mas\u0131n\u0131, \u201c\u00fcr\u00fcn\u00fcn\u00fc\u201d yine yery\u00fcz\u00fcnde bulmaya ba\u015flad\u0131k\u00e7a bu durum de\u011fi\u015fir: Tanr\u0131lar\u0131n kahkahas\u0131, insanda cisimle\u015fmeye ba\u015flar, bu kahkahan\u0131n trajedisinden komedi \u00e7\u0131kar.<\/p>\n

Platon asbestos gelos\u2019un ya da Homeros g\u00fcl\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fcn hiyerar\u015fik i\u00e7eri\u011fine kar\u015f\u0131d\u0131r. Philebos diyalogunda, ba\u015fkalar\u0131n\u0131n fiziksel ya da zihinsel kusurlar\u0131na, i\u00e7ine d\u00fc\u015ft\u00fckleri k\u00f6t\u00fc durumlara g\u00fcld\u00fc\u011f\u00fcm\u00fczde neye g\u00fcld\u00fc\u011f\u00fcm\u00fcz\u00fc sorar. Ba\u015fkalar\u0131n\u0131n kusuruna, erdemsizli\u011fine, cehaletine g\u00fclmek, Platon\u2019a g\u00f6re k\u00fc\u00e7\u00fcmseyici bir g\u00fclmedir. Ayr\u0131ca bu g\u00fcl\u00fc\u015fte, k\u00f6t\u00fc bir niyet ya da k\u0131skan\u00e7l\u0131k vard\u0131r. K\u0131skan\u00e7l\u0131k da ac\u0131 verici bir duygudur. O halde g\u00fclmede, daha \u00f6nce s\u00f6z\u00fcn\u00fc etti\u011fimiz keyif alma ve ac\u0131 i\u00e7 i\u00e7edir. O halde g\u00fclme, erdemli bir etkinlik olamaz. Platon\u2019un g\u00fclmeyi etik a\u00e7\u0131dan ele almas\u0131 \u00f6nemlidir. Ayr\u0131ca g\u00fclmeye kar\u015f\u0131 olumsuz yakla\u015f\u0131m\u0131, felsefede g\u00fclmeye kar\u015f\u0131 tak\u0131n\u0131lan tutumu belirlemede en az\u0131ndan bir s\u00fcre etkili olmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n

\"\"
\u0130tilip kak\u0131lm\u0131\u015f demirci ustas\u0131 Hephaistos\u2019a g\u00fclen tanr\u0131lar. Ancak, ayn\u0131 Hephaistos, kar\u0131s\u0131 Aphrodite\u2019yi Ares\u2019le yatakta basmak \u00fczere kurdu\u011fu d\u00fczenek i\u015fe yaray\u0131nca, \u201cson g\u00fclen iyi g\u00fcler\u201d deyimini somutla\u015ft\u0131rm\u0131\u015ft\u0131.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

Aristoteles de Platon gibi g\u00fclme ve kahkahan\u0131n, a\u015f\u0131r\u0131ya ka\u00e7ma e\u011filimini yans\u0131tabilece\u011fi konusunda uyar\u0131r. G\u00fclmede hep bir k\u00fc\u00e7\u00fcmseme, yukar\u0131dan bakma gizlidir. Ama Aristoteles yine de hep bir denge insan\u0131d\u0131r. Nikhomakhos\u2019a Etik\u2019teki me\u015fhur alt\u0131n oran, g\u00fclme i\u00e7in de ge\u00e7erlidir. G\u00fclme, iki a\u015f\u0131r\u0131 ucun ortas\u0131nda oldu\u011fu s\u00fcrece makbuld\u00fcr. Burada iki a\u015f\u0131r\u0131 u\u00e7, h\u00f6d\u00fck ya da mankafa ile maskara ya da soytar\u0131 aras\u0131ndad\u0131r. Yine de Aristoteles\u2019in g\u00fclme \u00fczerine muhtemelen pek \u00e7ok \u015fey s\u00f6yleyece\u011fi Poetika\u2019n\u0131n ikinci k\u0131sm\u0131 ne yaz\u0131k ki eksiktir, bu nedenle Aristoteles\u2019in g\u00fclme \u00fczerine bir teorisi oldu\u011fu iddia edilemez. Umberto Eco\u2019nun G\u00fcl\u00fcn Ad\u0131 roman\u0131nda bu kay\u0131p ikinci b\u00f6l\u00fcm \u00f6nemli bir yer tutar. Acaba bu k\u0131s\u0131m bilerek mi yok edilmi\u015ftir? Eco\u2019nun sordu\u011fu gibi: G\u00fclmekten neden korkulur? \u00c7\u00fcnk\u00fc g\u00fclmek korkuyu yener. \u015eeytan-cehennem korkusu olmazsa Tanr\u0131\u2019ya ihtiya\u00e7 kalmaz. Demek ki korku olmadan inan\u00e7 olmaz. Dini tesis etmek i\u00e7in g\u00fclmeyi bast\u0131rmak gerekir. H\u0131ristiyanl\u0131kla beraber g\u00fclmenin neredeyse tabu haline gelmesinde \u00fcst\u00fcnl\u00fck-k\u00fc\u00e7\u00fcmseme ili\u015fkisinin de etkisi vard\u0131r. \u00c7\u00fcnk\u00fc k\u00fc\u00e7\u00fcmseyici bir g\u00fcl\u00fc\u015f Tanr\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan gelirse sorun olmaz, ama Tanr\u0131\u2019ya kar\u015f\u0131 olursa bu bir felaket demektir. Bu nedenle H\u0131ristiyanl\u0131kla beraber Antik filozoflar\u0131n uyar\u0131s\u0131 deyim yerindeyse tamamen ciddiye al\u0131nm\u0131\u015f, g\u00fclme manast\u0131rlarda yasaklanm\u0131\u015f, kamusal alanda ay\u0131plam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Bunun yerine en az\u0131ndan rahatlamak i\u00e7in g\u00fclmek, karnavallar ve festivaller gibi k\u0131s\u0131tl\u0131 zaman dilimlerine yerle\u015ftirilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

Modern teoriler<\/strong>
\nFreud\u2019un n\u00fckte ya da espri (Witz) \u00fczerinden ara\u015ft\u0131rd\u0131\u011f\u0131 g\u00fclme davran\u0131\u015f\u0131, daha \u00e7ok bir engel y\u00fcz\u00fcnden ula\u015f\u0131lamayan arzu ya da \u00f6fke nesnesine ba\u015fka yoldan ula\u015f\u0131lma y\u00f6ntemi olarak ifade edilir. Bu anlamda g\u00fclme, bir t\u00fcr ruhsal bo\u015falma, rahatlamay\u0131 temsil eder. Rahatlama, bo\u015falma, bast\u0131r\u0131lan duygular\u0131n kendisi de\u011fil, bu duygular\u0131 bast\u0131rmaya yarayan enerjidir. Freud\u2019a g\u00f6re Witz d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda g\u00fcld\u00fc\u011f\u00fcm\u00fcz iki \u015fey daha vard\u0131r. Komi\u011fe g\u00fclme: Palya\u00e7onun hareketleri tuhaft\u0131r. Bu hareketleri anlamak i\u00e7in zihinsel bir \u00e7aba harcar\u0131z. Palya\u00e7oya g\u00fclmemizin nedeni, onun hareketlerini daha iyi anlamak i\u00e7in g\u00f6sterdi\u011fimiz fazladan zihinsel \u00e7aban\u0131n bo\u015falmas\u0131d\u0131r. Mizah: Gerginlik yaratan duygunun bo\u015fa \u00e7\u0131kmas\u0131yla olu\u015fan rahatlamad\u0131r. \u015e\u00f6yle bir hik\u00e2ye vard\u0131r: Bir ray i\u015f\u00e7isi yanl\u0131\u015fl\u0131kla patlayan dinamitten havaya u\u00e7ar, ak\u015fam vardiya bittikten sonra ancak s\u00fcr\u00fcnerek paras\u0131n\u0131 almak i\u00e7in i\u015fyerine d\u00f6nebilir, ama patronu haline ald\u0131rmadan \u201cNerede kald\u0131n be adam?\u201d diyerek onu azarlar ve maa\u015f\u0131ndan keser. Burada yine pek \u00e7ok fakt\u00f6r i\u00e7 i\u00e7e ge\u00e7mi\u015ftir. Bizler, adam \u00f6lmedi\u011fi i\u00e7in rahatlar\u0131z. Patronun bekledi\u011fimiz gibi onun haline hayret etmeyip bir de maa\u015f\u0131n\u0131 kesmesi, beklentilerimizi bo\u015fa \u00e7\u0131kard\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan ayr\u0131ca komiktir. S\u0131n\u0131fsal arka plan\u0131n kara mizah\u0131n\u0131 ise yazmaya bile gerek yoktur.<\/p>\n

\"\"
G\u00fclen Budha heykeli.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

Yine Witz kavram\u0131na d\u00f6nersek: Alman Romantizminin kurucular\u0131ndan Friedrich Schlegel\u2019e g\u00f6re Witz, yani n\u00fckte, modern ya\u015famla par\u00e7a par\u00e7a olmu\u015f toplumu ve onun t\u00fcm \u00f6\u011felerini birle\u015ftirebilecek yeg\u00e2ne y\u00f6ntemdir. Bir t\u00fcrl\u00fc anlaml\u0131 bir b\u00fct\u00fcn haline sokamad\u0131\u011f\u0131m\u0131z d\u00fcnyay\u0131 birle\u015ftirmenin sanatsal-edebi ifadesidir. Elbette burada ironik bir yan da vard\u0131r: N\u00fckte ve ironi, felsefenin ve edebiyat\u0131n i\u015fe yaramad\u0131\u011f\u0131 yerde devreye girer. \u0130nsan\u0131n b\u00fct\u00fcn \u00e7abalar\u0131na ra\u011fmen, \u00f6rne\u011fin ger\u00e7ekli\u011fin nihai do\u011fas\u0131n\u0131 anlayamayaca\u011f\u0131n\u0131n, bilgisinin ve bedeninin sonlulu\u011funun ifadesidir. Ancak bu nihilist bir g\u00fclme de\u011fildir, aksine, estetik ve eti\u011fi birle\u015ftirme iddias\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131yan iddial\u0131 bir projenin par\u00e7as\u0131d\u0131r.<\/p>\n

Alman Romantizminin Witz kavram\u0131n\u0131 ve alt\u0131nda yatan iddiay\u0131 -i\u00e7erikten ziyade bi\u00e7imsel olarak- Zen ustalar\u0131 ve \u00f6\u011frencileri aras\u0131ndaki diyaloglardan \u00e7\u0131kan \u201ckoan\u201d ile kar\u015f\u0131la\u015ft\u0131rabiliriz. Koanlar, t\u0131pk\u0131 Witz gibi, zihinle do\u011frudan kavranamayan\u0131 kavramaya y\u00f6nelik bir ara\u00e7 sunar. Zen ustalar\u0131n\u0131n \u00f6\u011frencilerine verdi\u011fi sarkastik ya da ironik yan\u0131tlar, zamanla birer meditasyon arac\u0131 haline gelen koanlara d\u00f6n\u00fc\u015fm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr. A\u015fa\u011f\u0131da ba\u015fka bir filozofun d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcncesi \u00e7er\u00e7evesinde de\u011finece\u011fim gibi, g\u00fclme, \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fcms\u00fczl\u00fc\u011fe (ya da \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fcms\u00fcz gibi g\u00f6r\u00fcnene) kar\u015f\u0131 bir yan\u0131t ya da parampar\u00e7a olan\u0131 birle\u015ftirmeye y\u00f6nelik bir \u00e7aba olabilir. Burada dikkat edilmesi gereken nokta, t\u0131pk\u0131 uyu\u015fmazl\u0131kta oldu\u011fu gibi, g\u00fclmenin mutlak bir \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fcms\u00fczl\u00fc\u011fe i\u015faret etmemesidir. Uyu\u015fmazl\u0131k ya da \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fcms\u00fczl\u00fck oldu\u011fu halleriyle kal\u0131rsa, aporiye, k\u0131s\u0131rd\u00f6ng\u00fcye, antinomiye ya da paradoksa d\u00f6n\u00fc\u015f\u00fcrler, g\u00fclme i\u00e7eri\u011fi olmaktan \u00e7\u0131karlar.<\/p>\n

G\u00fclme \u00fczerine en kapsaml\u0131 yazan filozof \u015f\u00fcphesiz Bergson\u2019dur. Filozofa g\u00f6re g\u00fclmek, salt insana \u00f6zg\u00fcd\u00fcr ve yaln\u0131zca insanla ili\u015fkilidir ve mutlaka toplumsal bir arka plan\u0131 vard\u0131r. Hayvanlar\u0131n hareketine g\u00fclmemizin nedeni, onlarda insani bir nitelik bulmam\u0131zdand\u0131r. Bergson\u2019un \u00fcnl\u00fc s\u00f6z\u00fc \u201cg\u00fclme, kalbin anl\u0131k hissizle\u015fmesidir\u201d, g\u00fclme an\u0131nda duygular\u0131n arka plana ge\u00e7i\u015fi ve akl\u0131n \u00f6ne \u00e7\u0131k\u0131\u015f\u0131n\u0131 ifade eder. Bu \u015fu anlama gelmektedir: G\u00fclme davran\u0131\u015f\u0131n\u0131n olu\u015fmas\u0131 i\u00e7in, duygular ve hareket aras\u0131ndaki ba\u011f\u0131n kopmas\u0131, ba\u011flam\u0131n par\u00e7alanmas\u0131 gerekir.\u00a0 Duygular\u0131n anl\u0131k geri \u00e7ekilmesi gerekir g\u00fclmek i\u00e7in. Dans edenleri izlerken kula\u011f\u0131m\u0131z\u0131 t\u0131karsak, g\u00f6r\u00fcnt\u00fc komik hale gelir. E\u011fer hareket ve duygu ba\u011f\u0131nt\u0131s\u0131 koparsa, insanlar\u0131n pek \u00e7ok davran\u0131\u015f\u0131 g\u00fcl\u00fcn\u00e7 hale gelir. Bunun temel nedeni, ba\u011flamdan kopmu\u015f hareketin mekanikle\u015fmesidir. Canl\u0131 olan mekanikli\u011fe indirgendi\u011finde komik olur. Burada canl\u0131 ve cans\u0131z aras\u0131ndaki \u00e7eli\u015fki ortaya \u00e7\u0131kar. Y\u00fcr\u00fcyen insan\u0131n d\u00fc\u015fmesine g\u00fcleriz, \u00e7\u00fcnk\u00fc burada canl\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131n ak\u0131\u015fkanl\u0131\u011f\u0131 sekteye u\u011frar. Stereotipilere ya da s\u00fcrekli kurala g\u00f6re hareket edene g\u00fcleriz, \u00e7\u00fcnk\u00fc s\u00fcrekli tekrar ya da kurala g\u00f6re hareket esnek de\u011fil mekaniktir. Taklide g\u00fclme nedenimiz de budur: Taklit kesintili, mekanik bir harekettir. Hareket ne kadar ak\u0131\u015fkan olursa olsun, taklit orijinal hareketin ak\u0131\u015fkanl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n yarat\u0131c\u0131l\u0131k i\u00e7ermeyen, mekanik tekrar\u0131 demektir.<\/p>\n

Platon\u2019a g\u00f6re ba\u015fkalar\u0131na g\u00fcld\u00fc\u011f\u00fcm\u00fczde etik bir hata yapar\u0131z. Bergson ise tam tersine g\u00fclmenin etik bir \u00f6z\u00fc oldu\u011funu \u00f6ne s\u00fcrer. \u00d6rne\u011fin d\u00fc\u015fen birine g\u00fcld\u00fc\u011f\u00fcm\u00fczde, d\u00fc\u015fme insan\u0131n canl\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n kesintiye u\u011framas\u0131n\u0131n d\u0131\u015favurumudur, yani biz insan-olmayana g\u00fclmekteyizdir. G\u00fclmek, insan\u0131n mekanikli\u011fe kar\u015f\u0131 tepkisidir, g\u00fclmede gizli bir yas vard\u0131r. Modern \u00e7a\u011f\u0131n gitgide mekanikle\u015fen d\u00fcnyas\u0131nda g\u00fclme, insan\u0131n son silahlar\u0131ndan biri olarak kalmaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n

N\u00fckte ve ironiyle bezeli g\u00fclme kavram\u0131n\u0131n her zaman varolu\u015fsal bir temeli olmu\u015ftur. Varolu\u015f\u00e7ulu\u011fun \u00f6nc\u00fclerinden Danimarkal\u0131 filozof Kierkegaard\u2019da g\u00fclme felsefi bir duru\u015ftur. G\u00fclme, ya\u015fam\u0131n her k\u00f6\u015fesinde bulunan \u00e7eli\u015fkiler ve bizim her \u015feyi anlamland\u0131rma ve bir b\u00fct\u00fcn i\u00e7inde kavrama \u00e7abam\u0131z\u0131n bo\u015funal\u0131\u011f\u0131 aras\u0131nda gidip gelir. Ya\/Ya da metninde \u015f\u00f6yle der Kierkegaard: \u201cBu d\u00fcnyada, ya\u015fam\u0131n anlam\u0131n\u0131n kendini emniyete almak, amac\u0131n\u0131n y\u00fcksek mevkilere gelmek, sevginin zenginli\u011fin evlilik, arkada\u015fl\u0131\u011f\u0131n kutsan\u0131\u015f\u0131n\u0131n zor durumda maddi yard\u0131m, bilgeli\u011fin \u00e7o\u011funlu\u011fun dedi\u011fi \u015fey, nezaketin \u2018ho\u015f geldiniz\u2019 demek oldu\u011fun g\u00f6rd\u00fcm ve b\u00fct\u00fcn bunlara g\u00fcld\u00fcm.\u201d Ya\/Ya da\u2019da Kierkegaard\u2019\u0131n g\u00fclmeye kar\u015f\u0131 derin tutumu burada irdelenemeyecek kadar \u00e7ok boyutludur. En az\u0131ndan \u015fu s\u00f6ylenebilir Kierkegaard\u2019da g\u00fclme, insan\u0131n \u00e7eli\u015fkiler yuma\u011f\u0131 varl\u0131\u011f\u0131na ve bizzat varolu\u015fa yine varolu\u015fun i\u00e7inden bir tepkidir.<\/p>\n

Kierkegaard\u2019a felsefi anlamda uzak olsa da, g\u00fclme teorisi a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan varolu\u015f\u00e7ulu\u011fa yak\u0131n bir isim,\u00a0 2. D\u00fcnya Sava\u015f\u0131 s\u0131ras\u0131nda k\u0131sa bir s\u00fcre i\u00e7in olsa da \u0130stanbul\u2019a gelen filozof Helmut Plessner\u2019dir. Plessner\u2019in G\u00fclme ve A\u011flama: \u0130nsan Davran\u0131\u015f\u0131n\u0131n S\u0131n\u0131rlar\u0131 \u00dczerine adl\u0131 denemesi, g\u00fclmenin fenomenolojisi a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan bir d\u00f6n\u00fcm noktas\u0131d\u0131r. Plessner\u2019in denemesi, g\u00fclme ve a\u011flamada, nedense hi\u00e7 d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fclmeyen bedeni de i\u015fin i\u00e7in katt\u0131\u011f\u0131 i\u00e7in \u00e7ok \u00f6nemlidir. Felsefe tarihinde g\u00fclme, kendisi bariz bir \u015fekilde fiziksel bir d\u0131\u015favurum olsa da, genel olarak yaln\u0131zca zihinsel bir etkinli\u011fin sonucu olarak d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fclm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr. Plessner\u2019in kuram\u0131, her \u015feyden \u00f6nce beden ve zihin aras\u0131nda varsayd\u0131\u011f\u0131m\u0131z ikili\u011fi yeniden d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnmemizi sa\u011flar. G\u00fclme ve a\u011flama gibi en temel davran\u0131\u015flar \u00fczerine derin bir d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnce, insan\u0131 bir b\u00fct\u00fcn olarak ele alarak i\u015fe ba\u015flamal\u0131d\u0131r.<\/p>\n

Plessner\u2019e g\u00f6re g\u00fclme ve a\u011flama, sevin\u00e7 ya da nefret gibi de\u011fildir, \u00e7\u00fcnk\u00fc daha dolays\u0131zd\u0131rlar, hatta bu bak\u0131mdan y\u00fcz k\u0131zarmas\u0131na, \u00f6ks\u00fcr\u00fcp hap\u015f\u0131rmaya daha yak\u0131nd\u0131rlar bile denebilir. Ama elbette tam \u00f6yle de de\u011fillerdir, \u00e7\u00fcnk\u00fc belirli d\u0131\u015fsal-toplumsal nedenleri vard\u0131r. O halde g\u00fclme ve a\u011flaman\u0131n kendine \u00f6zg\u00fc bir yeri vard\u0131r, hem dolays\u0131z bir bedensel tepkidirler, hem de \u00e7o\u011funlukla toplumsal-\u00e7evresel nedenleri vard\u0131r. G\u00fclme ve a\u011flama, bedenin zihinsel benlikten ba\u011f\u0131ms\u0131z bir tepki vermesiyle meydana gelir; benlik ve beden aras\u0131nda bir t\u00fcr k\u0131sa devreye benzetilebilir. \u00d6zellikle g\u00fclme, bedenin, bilinci devre d\u0131\u015f\u0131 b\u0131rakarak var olan duruma verdi\u011fi yan\u0131tt\u0131r. Plessner\u2019in ifadesine g\u00f6re, \u201cinsan g\u00fclmeye d\u00fc\u015fer\u201d, yani g\u00fclme istem d\u0131\u015f\u0131d\u0131r, beden benli\u011fi g\u00fclmeye iter.<\/p>\n

\"\"
Freud\u2019a g\u00f6re, palya\u00e7oya g\u00fclmemizin nedeni, onun hareketlerini daha iyi anlamak i\u00e7in g\u00f6sterdi\u011fimiz fazladan zihinsel \u00e7aban\u0131n bo\u015falmas\u0131d\u0131r.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

G\u00fclmede, beden bir anl\u0131\u011f\u0131na zihnin boyunduru\u011fundan kurtulur. Bunu ba\u015farabilmesinin nedeni, zihnin g\u00fclme an\u0131ndan hemen \u00f6nceki durumla kolay kolay ba\u015f edememesidir. Daha \u00f6nce s\u00f6z\u00fcn\u00fc etti\u011fimiz g\u00fclmeye ili\u015fkin karma\u015f\u0131k durumlar, her zaman zihnin yan\u0131t verebilece\u011fi durumlar de\u011fildir. Burada yan\u0131t\u0131 beden vermektedir, durumun karma\u015f\u0131kl\u0131\u011f\u0131na verdi\u011fi tepkiyle, deyim yerindeyse zihni rahatlatmaktad\u0131r. Bir yandan da zihnin ba\u011flar\u0131ndan kurtuldu\u011fundan bir an i\u00e7in \u00f6zg\u00fcrle\u015fmektedir. Peki, zihin neden b\u00f6yle bir a\u00e7maz\u0131n i\u00e7ine girer?<\/p>\n

Plessner\u2019e g\u00f6re insan eksantrik (eksantrik s\u00f6zc\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fcn k\u00f6keninde Yunanca ek-kentros, yani \u201cmerkezin d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda olma, merkezsiz olma\u201d anlam\u0131 vard\u0131r.) bir varl\u0131kt\u0131r. Bunu a\u00e7\u0131klamak i\u00e7in \u00f6nce canl\u0131 ve cans\u0131z aras\u0131ndaki ayr\u0131m\u0131 koymak gerekir: Canl\u0131 ve cans\u0131z\u0131 ay\u0131ran kavram \u201cs\u0131n\u0131r\u201dd\u0131r. Canl\u0131lar\u0131n cans\u0131zlara g\u00f6re bir s\u0131n\u0131r\u0131 vard\u0131r. T\u00fcm organizmalar \u00e7evreleriyle bir etkile\u015fim halindedir ve bu etkile\u015fim ayn\u0131 zamanda ikisi aras\u0131nda bir s\u0131n\u0131r yarat\u0131r. \u0130nsan\u0131n bitki ve hayvandan fark\u0131, kendi s\u0131n\u0131rlar\u0131 \u00fczerine d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnerek kendini yeniden s\u0131n\u0131rland\u0131rmas\u0131, yeni s\u0131n\u0131rlar koyabilmesidir. Bu ise salt d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnme arac\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131yla olmaz; insan, bedeniyle ve zihniyle bir b\u00fct\u00fcn olarak hem bir benlik hem de bir ifade arac\u0131d\u0131r. \u0130nsan hem burada ve \u015fimdidedir, hem de tasar\u0131mlar\u0131yla ya da bedensel belle\u011fiyle ge\u00e7mi\u015f ya da gelecektedir; ki\u015fili\u011fi ya da benli\u011fi de her zaman ba\u015fka bir \u015feye d\u00f6n\u00fc\u015fmeye a\u00e7\u0131kt\u0131r. \u0130\u015fte bu a\u00e7\u0131kl\u0131k, onu ayn\u0131 zamanda merkezsiz, yani eksantrik yapar.<\/p>\n

Eksantriklik, insan\u0131n s\u0131n\u0131rlar\u0131n\u0131n a\u00e7\u0131kl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ve esnekli\u011fini ifade eder; insan\u0131n zihni ve bedeni, kendisi ve \u00e7evresi aras\u0131na koydu\u011fu s\u0131n\u0131rlar\u0131n ve mesafenin ifadesidir. \u0130nsan, dil arac\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131yla ya da jest ve mimiklerle (beden diliyle) kendi bedenine zihinsel bir h\u00e2kimiyet kurar. Ama zihnin do\u011frudan ba\u015f edemedi\u011fi durumlarda g\u00fclme ve a\u011flama arac\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131yla beden-zihin hiyerar\u015fisi alt \u00fcst olur. Plessner\u2019e g\u00f6re o anda, insan s\u0131n\u0131rlar\u0131n\u0131 fark eder; yaln\u0131zca kendisiyle \u00e7evresi aras\u0131ndaki s\u0131n\u0131r\u0131 de\u011fil, zihni ve bedeni aras\u0131na koydu\u011fu s\u0131n\u0131r\u0131 da. B\u00f6ylece insan kendisini ender de olsa bir b\u00fct\u00fcn olarak deneyimler. T\u00fcm bunlar\u0131n yan\u0131nda g\u00fclme, daha \u00f6nce s\u00f6z\u00fc edildi\u011fi gibi, zihinsel olan\u0131n yan\u0131tlayamad\u0131\u011f\u0131na bir yan\u0131tt\u0131r, bu bak\u0131mdan Romantizmin ya da varolu\u015f\u00e7ulu\u011fun ironik g\u00fcl\u00fc\u015f\u00fcne benzemektedir, ancak bu, felsefenin y\u00fczy\u0131llard\u0131r ihmal etti\u011fi bedenin bir g\u00fcl\u00fc\u015f\u00fcd\u00fcr, teorik bir g\u00fcl\u00fc\u015f de\u011fildir, daha do\u011frusu sahici g\u00fcl\u00fc\u015f, bedenin bir anl\u0131k da olsa zihinsel esaretten kurtuldu\u011fu anda ger\u00e7ekle\u015fmektedir.<\/p>\n

Not: <\/strong>Bu yaz\u0131 Bilim ve Gelecek dergisinin 168.say\u0131s\u0131nda Mehmet Bar\u0131\u015f Albayrak imza\u0131yla yay\u0131mlanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Plessner\u2019e g\u00f6re g\u00fclmede, beden bir anl\u0131\u011f\u0131na zihnin boyunduru\u011fundan kurtulur. Bunu ba\u015farabilmesinin nedeni, zihnin g\u00fclme an\u0131ndan hemen \u00f6nceki durumla kolay kolay ba\u015f edememesidir. G\u00fclmeye ili\u015fkin karma\u015f\u0131k durumlar, her zaman zihnin yan\u0131t verebilece\u011fi durumlar de\u011fildir. Burada yan\u0131t\u0131 beden vermektedir, durumun karma\u015f\u0131kl\u0131\u011f\u0131na verdi\u011fi tepkiyle, deyim yerindeyse zihni rahatlatmaktad\u0131r. Bir yandan da zihnin ba\u011flar\u0131ndan kurtuldu\u011fundan bir an i\u00e7in \u00f6zg\u00fcrle\u015fmektedir. […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":429,"featured_media":51800,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[19],"tags":[1150,237,1669,1076],"class_list":["post-51799","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-bilim-gundemi","tag-beden","tag-felsefe","tag-gulme","tag-zihin"],"acf":[],"aioseo_notices":[],"aioseo_head":"\n\t\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t