There are not many philosophies but only THE Philosophy as ultimately defined by Pythagoras – in a geometry class while demonstrating a theorem – as the love of wisdom. He said the act of philosophizing must be ad more geometrico, with rigorous and apodictic demonstrations. If that were the procedure Philosophy would not be a matter of disagreement but of human closeness.
Mathematics has no disagreements for the reason that it works in the speculative field and rigorous demonstration – even though some divergence can occur on the practical application side. It obviously cannot achieve an incommutable perfection – a perfect triangle is still relative – but it urges to provide Philosophy with another meaning and only a construction such as referred can generate a whole, positive and perennial Philosophy throughout centuries and millennia.
Philosophy was brought to us by Pythagoras, Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, the Scholastics, the great Persians. Nevertheless, our time undergoes a phase of confusion because aesthetes invaded Philosophy and the aesthetic or romantic spirit is destructive since it presumes Philosophy as subjective, personal.
We fight for a new direction, a return to the real pathway that is truly ours, a humanity heritage. Philosophy is not philodoxy, it is not the field of hints, the field of opinions. In Philosophy there is no place for opinions. When one asks “what is your opinion?”, one is not philosophizing but philodoxying. Philosophy must demonstrate or – once demonstration is not possible – suspend the affirmation until further investigation comes to a rigorous demonstration.
However, one cannot find an apodictic explanation for a contingent fact. To try to reduce the facts of science to a speculative meaning and absolutely apodictic reasoning is a complete failure. They are always probable and that is the field of scientific probabilities. For example, it is probable that that loose stone is going to fall down from the wall. There is no absolute necessity.
Nowadays, there is a great deal of confusion. So many tendencies, so many schools. During the Scholasticism there were many open questions but there were unity as a general rule. The same goes for the Pythagorism: notwithstanding so many divergences, there was unity, which provided embodiment and harmony.
We call our philosophy concrete due to the fact that it seeks to “concretefy”, solidify the positive aspects of the entire philosophizing act by demonstrating as apodictically as possible inasmuch as avoiding the medium term, i.e., avoiding the use of purely scientific reasoning whenever possible.
Translated by Rodrigo Morais