I must first identify the things that could hinder me on the path to truth.
I should exclude my will when examining a subject.
I must examine events and facts without being influenced by any belief or ideology.
I should doubt everything except for the obvious truths.
I should not be influenced by the thoughts of the majority or the minority. The number of believers cannot turn a falsehood into truth.
I should not determine the truth based on fear.
I should not determine the truth based on interests. Truth should not benefit me in any way; I should philosophize for the sake of truth alone.
I should not accept strong opinions without testing them.
To think correctly, I must acquire correct information.
The methods for acquiring correct information will undoubtedly include primarily the methods of reasoning, such as mathematics, logic, and dialectics. I will trust the knowledge obtained from logic more than the knowledge obtained from dialectics. If scientific knowledge has not become a law, I will approach it carefully. I will be especially careful with orators, rhetoricians, politicians, and poets. Even if occasionally a sentence with informational value comes out of their mouths, I will never consider it as a tool in the search for truth. In fact, I will always consider them as the most unreliable sources of information.
If I use history in my reasoning, I will annotate the information I can reach. Historians are very rarely reliable because their affiliations with nations cloud their perspectives.
Astronomers and physicists are another group that often provides incorrect information; I have witnessed them presenting some unproven phenomena as truths for the sake of their ideologies. According to the principle that once a deceiver, always a deceiver, I will approach the information I obtain from them with caution.
I do not choose religions as a battlefield. Reasoning about things related to belief is not possible. In the quest for truth, I will reject information coming from things related to belief. I will not allow the truth to be tainted by belief.
If I make unfounded predictions with no informational value, I will openly admit it.
There is an inconsistency in my reasoning that I overlooked, and if someone else notices it, I will immediately delete my suggestions or recommendations and start over.
I will be aware of myself and what I do not know. If I need to benefit from the subjects I cannot reach due to my limitations, I will turn to the most competent sources.
I will proceed, always knowing what I do not know.
I will focus on changing not the world but the smallest unit of society, the individual, that is, changing myself.
Morality has always been clear to me and is even clearer now. Following the laws made by good legislators to facilitate social and individual life is morality. As Kant said, we can consider the concept that can be applied universally as morality.
I understand wisdom as abiding by the laws, and in my relationship with individuals and society, observing justice. I am not looking for anything beyond that. I do not deny the truths derived from social memory and almost considered truth with experience. I prefer universal ones rather than local ones. Wisdom is not synonymous with mysticism. I cannot think of giving credence to things derived from imagination, which, like visions, have no informational value. I will use moderation, justice, courage, etc., the ancient wisdoms, by filling them with content, in a philosophical way.
I believe in the healing power of truth. Most of the wounds of the soul come from actions against the truth. Knowing this, I try to live as true as possible, always aware of my shortcomings.
I cannot find a reason to take seriously any argument developed for or against philosophy with specific goals or purely out of ignorance; in fact, I find it contradictory to take arguments seriously due to the purpose of the arguments put forward. Developing arguments in philosophy is already ridiculous. Since there is relatively little reasoning in scientists and their conceptual thinking is inadequate, I do not take them seriously in any way. I see philosophy as the highest ability in humans.
I accept that being human includes emotions, and I know that sometimes emotions can also be the subject of philosophy. While valuing emotions, if they are not the subject of inquiry, I exclude them from philosophy.
I never discuss philosophical subjects with fools. Those I call fools are those who appear in philosophy and are actually hostile to philosophy due to their inadequacies. These are always potential harms as the hypocrites of philosophy. While those who have no interest can never cause such harm. The hypocrites of philosophy also try to cover the truth by acting like infidels. Therefore, those are the ones I should stay away from the most.
I know that our roots are in ancient philosophy, and with the famous expression, I know that I rise on the shoulders of ancient philosophers. I definitely do not see someone who denies ancient philosophy in philosophy because I know for sure that that person is unaware of most of the fundamental issues. I do not find it appropriate to discuss philosophy with someone who is not in philosophy.
I deny turning philosophical conversations into a kind of rhetoric with unnecessary words. The methods of philosophy are clear.
I should try not to have preconceptions and, if I have acquired such germs, I should not use philosophy to justify these preconceptions.
I should not doubt obvious facts. As long as the interaction in things can be sensed, regardless of the nature of the reality of the things, I must accept facts and events. Since I am obliged to build the truth in this reality, I should be even more careful in my metaphysical reasonings.
If a matter has been reasoned correctly, and unquestionable information has emerged, I should adopt them to save time.
If something has been discussed before me, and a problem has been brought up, I should state it openly.
I should have a wakeful mind to grasp the existence of subjects where I have no inclination to reach correct knowledge.
I will proceed, always knowing what I do not know.
I must accept that I will encounter subjects that exceed the limits of my mind and accept that I must overcome them.
I should determine my principles as briefly and concisely as possible to keep them in mind and make them a habit.
I must acknowledge that philosophy owes nothing to anyone and has already given the greatest gift that can be given to humanity. I should not care at all about what the masses think about this. Philosophers are soldiers of a voluntary work, not debtors.
I will not evaluate philosophy and philosophers to the extent of deifying them.
