{"id":5852,"date":"2021-04-17T22:51:00","date_gmt":"2021-04-17T19:51:00","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/turkiyekanttoplulugu.org\/?p=5852"},"modified":"2021-04-18T00:40:07","modified_gmt":"2021-04-17T21:40:07","slug":"kant-etigi-uzerine-notlar-neden-kant-etigi1-copy","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/turkiyekanttoplulugu.org\/?p=5852&lang=en","title":{"rendered":"Notes on Kantian Ethics: Why Kantian Ethics?[1]"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

*This article is written in Turkish.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Author: Harun Tepe<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Kant eti\u011fini anlatt\u0131\u011f\u0131m ders ve konu\u015fmalar\u0131ma \u00e7o\u011funlukla bu soruyla ba\u015flar\u0131m. Bunun da \u00e7ok yal\u0131n ve s\u0131k\u00e7a tekrarlad\u0131\u011f\u0131m bir yan\u0131t\u0131 vard\u0131r: Kant eti\u011finin g\u00fcnl\u00fck ya\u015fam\u0131m\u0131zda bizim de rahats\u0131z oldu\u011fumuz, etik bir sorun olarak g\u00f6rd\u00fc\u011f\u00fcm\u00fcz \u015feyi kuramla\u015ft\u0131rm\u0131\u015f olmas\u0131d\u0131r. Kant eti\u011fi bir anlamda malumun ilan\u0131 gibidir. Bu nedenle, etik eylemde bulunmak, etik bir ki\u015fi olmak i\u00e7in kimsenin etik kitaplar\u0131 okumas\u0131na, Kant eti\u011fini bilmesine gerek yoktur. Kant eti\u011fini okuyup anlad\u0131\u011f\u0131nda insan olsa olsa kendi yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n neden etik veya etik olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 anlayabilir. Bu konu kafas\u0131nda a\u00e7\u0131k hale gelebilir. Zira Kant eti\u011fi bizi rahats\u0131z eden, olmamas\u0131 veya yap\u0131lmamas\u0131 gerekir dedi\u011fimiz \u015feyin neden yap\u0131lmamas\u0131 gereken bir eylem oldu\u011funu bize kuramsal olarak g\u00f6steren bir g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr. Ben bunu genellikle Kant eti\u011finin fenomene uygun bir etik g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f oldu\u011fu, yani g\u00fcnl\u00fck ya\u015famda \u201cbu etiktir\u201d veya \u201ceti\u011fe ayk\u0131r\u0131d\u0131r\u201d denileni uygun bir bi\u00e7imde kavramla\u015ft\u0131ran bir g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f oldu\u011fu bi\u00e7iminde ifade ediyorum. Bir ki\u015finin ba\u015fka ki\u015fileri yaln\u0131z ara\u00e7 olarak kullanarak kendi mutlulu\u011funu ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirmeyi ama\u00e7layan eylemlerini kimse -en az\u0131ndan yap\u0131p ettiklerine veya kendisine yap\u0131l\u0131p edilenlere ele\u015ftirel bakabilme becerisine sahip olan hi\u00e7 kimse- ahlakl\u0131 ya da etik bir eylem olarak g\u00f6rmez, g\u00f6remez. Bu t\u00fcr eylemlerin ahlakl\u0131 bir eylem olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 bilir ya da d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnebilir ki\u015filer. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Kant, ahlak yasas\u0131n\u0131n buyru\u011funa uygun olan\u0131 bilmenin \u00e7ok zor bir \u015fey olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, en s\u0131radan ve deneyimsiz anlama yetisinin bile bunu bilebilece\u011fini; etik eylemde bulunman\u0131n veya ahlakl\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131n kesin buyru\u011funu yerine getirmenin herkes i\u00e7in her zaman m\u00fcmk\u00fcn oldu\u011funu s\u00f6yledi\u011finde de (Kant 1980: 64-65) ayn\u0131 \u015feyi dile getirmektedir. Ahlakl\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131n gere\u011fini yerine getirmek, yani belirli bir durumda \u00e7\u0131karlar\u0131m\u0131z\u0131n gerektirdi\u011fini de\u011fil de \u201cyap\u0131lmas\u0131 gerekeni\u201d yapmak herkesin elindedir. Zira bunu bize buyuran ve saf ak\u0131ldan gelen bir yasa olan ahlak yasas\u0131n\u0131 veya onun buyru\u011funu -kesin buyru\u011fu- duymak ve ona g\u00f6re hareket etmek herkesin elindedir.  Bunun aksine mutlulu\u011fun deneysel ko\u015fullu buyru\u011funu yerine getirmenin, yani ki\u015finin belli bir durumda nas\u0131l eylemde bulunursa kendi \u00e7\u0131karlar\u0131n\u0131 en iyi koruyabilece\u011finin, ancak seyrek olarak insan\u0131n elinde oldu\u011funu s\u00f6yler Kant (Kant 1980: 65). Zira o durumda yap\u0131lmas\u0131 gerekeni bulmak birincisi kadar kolay de\u011fildir, bu zeki, yani kurnaz olmay\u0131 gerektirir. Bu nedenle onu bulmak daha g\u00fc\u00e7t\u00fcr der Kant.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Kant eti\u011fi,\nku\u015fkusuz, g\u00fcn\u00fcm\u00fcz\u00fcn en \u00e7ok tart\u0131\u015f\u0131lan etik g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015flerinin ba\u015f\u0131nda gelmektedir. Geier\nbunu \u201cKant\u2019a de\u011finmeyen hi\u00e7bir modern ahlak felsefesi yoktur\u201d bi\u00e7iminde ifade\neder (Geier 2009: 243). Bu \u00f6nemli yerine kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131k Kant eti\u011fi, \u00e7o\u011funlukla eksik\nya da yanl\u0131\u015f anlamaya dayanan, ele\u015ftirilerle kar\u015f\u0131la\u015fmaktad\u0131r. Yap\u0131lan\nele\u015ftiriler takdir ve \u00f6vg\u00fclerden \u00e7ok daha fazlad\u0131r. Bunda onun eti\u011fini Pratik Akl\u0131n Ele\u015ftirisi<\/em> ve Ahlak Metafizi\u011finin Temellendirilmesi<\/em>\nkitaplar\u0131nda ortaya koydu\u011fu d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnceler yerine, g\u00fcn\u00fcm\u00fcz\u00fcn yayg\u0131n bak\u0131\u015f a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131yla\npek uyu\u015fmayan \u2013katillerin her durumda \u00f6ld\u00fcr\u00fclmeleri gerekti\u011fi, intihar\u0131n \u00f6deve\nkar\u015f\u0131 \u00e7\u0131kmak oldu\u011fu, cinsel ili\u015fkinin insan\u0131 al\u00e7altt\u0131\u011f\u0131, mast\u00fcrbasyonun\nintihardan daha b\u00fcy\u00fck bir su\u00e7 oldu\u011fu, kendi i\u00e7inde yanl\u0131\u015f olan bir \u015fey emretmedi\u011fi\ns\u00fcrece kurallara uygun olarak kurulmu\u015f siyasi otoriteye kar\u015f\u0131 \u00e7\u0131kman\u0131n hi\u00e7bir\ngerek\u00e7esinin olamayaca\u011f\u0131, masum bir insan\u0131n hayat\u0131n\u0131 kurtarmak i\u00e7in bile olsa\nyalan s\u00f6ylemenin her zaman yanl\u0131\u015f olaca\u011f\u0131 gibi- g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fleri (Wood 2009: 166-167)\n\u00fczerinden okuman\u0131n etkisi olsa da, kendi d\u00f6neminden g\u00fcn\u00fcm\u00fcze, onun felsefe\nyapma tarz\u0131n\u0131n ve etikte sorun edindi\u011fi \u015feyin g\u00f6zden ka\u00e7\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131n da etkili\noldu\u011fu d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fclebilir. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Ayr\u0131ca Kant eti\u011finin ele\u015ftirilmesinde \u00f6nemli olan ba\u015fka bir etken de, g\u00fcn\u00fcm\u00fcz\u00fcn Zeitgeist<\/em>\u2019\u0131n\u0131n \u00f6devlerden \u00e7ok \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fckleri \u00f6ne \u00e7\u0131karmas\u0131 nedeniyle, \u201c\u00f6dev eti\u011fi\u201d olarak adland\u0131r\u0131lan ve insanlara “yapmal\u0131s\u0131n!”, “etmelisin!” diyen bir etik g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn -burada buyrulan \u015feyin eylemden ziyade istemeye, hatta istemenin dayand\u0131\u011f\u0131 \u00f6znel ilkeye ili\u015fkin oldu\u011fu da s\u0131k\u00e7a g\u00f6zden ka\u00e7\u0131r\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 i\u00e7in- ele\u015ftirilmesinden daha do\u011fal bir \u015fey yoktur. \u00d6zg\u00fcrl\u00fckten yayg\u0131n olarak engellenmemenin, istedi\u011fini yapman\u0131n anla\u015f\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 bir k\u00fclt\u00fcr ortam\u0131nda yasadan, buyruktan, \u00f6dev ve y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fckten s\u00f6z eden bir etik g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn k\u00fc\u00e7\u00fcmsenmesinden, itilip kak\u0131lmas\u0131ndan daha do\u011fal ne olabilir?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Kant eti\u011fi,\nbunlar\u0131n yan\u0131nda, her birisi \u00fczerinde ayr\u0131nt\u0131l\u0131 bir \u00e7al\u0131\u015fma yapmay\u0131 gerektiren,\nonun eti\u011finin mutluluk kar\u015f\u0131t\u0131, mutlu olmay\u0131 yasaklayan asketik bir g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\noldu\u011fu; formalist bir etik oldu\u011fu (M. Scheler); bir praksis<\/em> kavram\u0131na sahip olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, Kant\u2019\u0131n pratik ak\u0131l kavram\u0131n\u0131n\npratik niyetlerin hizmetine sunulmu\u015f bir teorik ak\u0131l oldu\u011fu; tarihselli\u011fi\ntamamen bir yana b\u0131rakan salt bir \u201cgereklilik eti\u011fi\u201d oldu\u011fu (Tepe 2016: 164);\nmetafizik temellere dayand\u0131\u011f\u0131, \u00f6zellikle metafizik bir tanr\u0131 kavram\u0131n\u0131 temele\nald\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve etikte nihai temellendirmeyi yapmada ba\u015far\u0131s\u0131z oldu\u011fu gibi\nele\u015ftirilerle kar\u015f\u0131la\u015fmaktad\u0131r. Wood\u2019a g\u00f6re, Kant eti\u011finin yayg\u0131n bir bi\u00e7imde\nyanl\u0131\u015f anla\u015f\u0131lmas\u0131na yol a\u00e7an iki nokta ise Kant\u2019\u0131n \u201czaman d\u0131\u015f\u0131\u201d, \u201ctarih d\u0131\u015f\u0131\u201d\nbir ak\u0131l anlay\u0131\u015f\u0131na sahip oldu\u011fu ele\u015ftirisi ile \u00e7ok say\u0131da ki\u015finin Kant\u2019ta\nyapay bir metafizik ikicilik g\u00f6rmeleri; bu etik g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn do\u011faya, duyulara veya\nbedene (Stoac\u0131 veya inzivac\u0131 bir bi\u00e7imde) d\u00fc\u015fman oldu\u011funu d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnmeleridir (Wood 2009:\n170). Kant ger\u00e7i ki\u015finin kendi mutlulu\u011funu ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirmeye y\u00f6nelik hi\u00e7bir\n\u00f6znel ilkenin yasa haline getirilemeyece\u011fini s\u00f6yleyerek, ahlakl\u0131l\u0131k bilinci ile\nbir mutluluk beklentisi aras\u0131nda do\u011fal bir ba\u011f oldu\u011fu d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcncesine kar\u015f\u0131 \u00e7\u0131kar;\nzira en y\u00fcksek iyinin ilk ko\u015fulu olarak en \u00fcst\u00fcn iyi ahlakl\u0131l\u0131kt\u0131r. Mutluluk\nger\u00e7i en \u00fcst\u00fcn iyinin ikinci \u00f6\u011fesini olu\u015ftursa da, ancak ahlaksal ko\u015ful yerine\ngetirilince, ahlakl\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131n zorunlu sonucu olunca bu nitelikte olur (Kant 1980:\n214). Bu da bize Kant\u2019\u0131n mutlulu\u011fa kar\u015f\u0131 olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, sadece mutlulu\u011fun veya ben\nsevgisinin \u00f6znel ilke yap\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131n hi\u00e7bir zaman ki\u015fiyi ahlakl\u0131 eyleme\ng\u00f6t\u00fcrmeyece\u011fine vurgu yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 g\u00f6stermektedir. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Kant eti\u011finin\nbir ba\u015far\u0131s\u0131 etikte Kopernik\u2019in do\u011fa bilimlerinde yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 t\u00fcrden bir devrimi\nger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirmi\u015f olmas\u0131d\u0131r. Kendisinden \u00f6nceki etik g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fleri \u015fu ya da bu\n\u015fekilde \u201ciyi\u201d ve \u201ck\u00f6t\u00fc\u201dn\u00fcn ne oldu\u011funu varsayarak, ona g\u00f6re neyi yapman\u0131n iyi\nneyin k\u00f6t\u00fc oldu\u011funu belirlemeye \u00e7al\u0131\u015f\u0131rken, Kant bunu tersine \u00e7evirerek \u201ciyi\u201d\nve \u201ck\u00f6t\u00fc\u201dn\u00fcn ancak ahlak yasas\u0131na g\u00f6re belirlenebilece\u011fini iddia eder. Kant, \u201c(g\u00f6r\u00fcn\u00fc\u015fe\ng\u00f6re ahlak yasas\u0131n\u0131n temeline konmas\u0131 gereken) iyi ve k\u00f6t\u00fc kavram\u0131[n\u0131n] (burada\nyap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 gibi) ahlak yasas\u0131ndan \u00f6nce de\u011fil, ancak bu yasadan sonra ve onun\narac\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131yla tan\u0131mlanmas\u0131\u201d (Kant 1980: 110) gerekti\u011fini s\u00f6yler. Genellikle\nd\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fcld\u00fc\u011f\u00fc gibi, iyi kavram\u0131n\u0131n ahlak yasas\u0131n\u0131 belirlemedi\u011fini, aksine ahlak\nyasas\u0131n\u0131n ilk \u00f6nce iyi kavram\u0131n\u0131 belirledi\u011fini ve olanakl\u0131 k\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 dile\ngetirir (Kant 1980: 112). \u201c\u0130yi\u201d ahlak yasan\u0131na uygun olan\u0131 istemektir ya da\nahlak yasas\u0131n\u0131 istemektir. Ba\u015fka bir deyi\u015fle, ancak bunu isteyen eylemler,\ndayand\u0131\u011f\u0131 \u00f6znel ilke bir do\u011fa yasas\u0131 gibi genel-ge\u00e7er olabilecek nitelikte olan\neylemler, etik ya da ahlakl\u0131 eylemlerdir. Bu onun etikte ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirdi\u011fi\nKopernik devrimidir. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Kant etikle ilgili ana metinleri olan Pratik Akl\u0131n Ele\u015ftirisi <\/em>ve Ahlak Metafizi\u011finin Temellendirilmesi\u2019<\/em>nde\nher birimizin g\u00fcnl\u00fck ya\u015fam\u0131ndan iyi bildi\u011fi ahlakl\u0131 eylemin veya etik eylemde\nbulunman\u0131n nas\u0131l m\u00fcmk\u00fcn oldu\u011funu, bunu insanda m\u00fcmk\u00fcn k\u0131lan yap\u0131y\u0131 ortaya\nkoymaya \u00e7al\u0131\u015f\u0131r. Deneysel olan her \u015feyden tamamen ar\u0131nd\u0131r\u0131lm\u0131\u015f saf bir ahlak\nfelsefesi geli\u015ftirmenin bir zorunluluk oldu\u011funu d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnen Kant, b\u00f6yle bir ahlak\nmetafizi\u011finin i\u015finin ise olanakl\u0131 bir saf isteme idesini ve ilkelerini\nara\u015ft\u0131rmak olarak g\u00f6r\u00fcr (Kant 1982: XII). \n<\/p>\n\n\n\n

 Kant\u2019\u0131n olanakl\u0131 oldu\u011funu g\u00f6stermeye \u00e7al\u0131\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131\n\u015fey, ahlakl\u0131 eylemler ya da ki\u015finin arzu ve e\u011filimlerinin istemesini\nbelirlemesine gerekti\u011finde engel olarak ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirdi\u011fi ahlakl\u0131 ya da etik\neylemlerdir. \u0130nsan ya\u015fam\u0131 bu eylemlerle doludur. Kant t\u00fcm eylemlerimizin bu iki\nt\u00fcr eylemden, ahlakl\u0131 ve ahlakl\u0131 olmayan eylemlerden, olu\u015ftu\u011funu d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fcr.\nYa\u015famda kar\u015f\u0131la\u015f\u0131lan ahlakl\u0131 veya etik eylemlerden yola \u00e7\u0131karak ve bunlar\u0131n az\nda olsa kimi durumlarda ger\u00e7ekle\u015fti\u011fini g\u00f6rerek, bunun nas\u0131l olanakl\u0131 oldu\u011funu\nsorar ve bunu insan\u0131n bilme ve arzulama yetisinde m\u00fcmk\u00fcn k\u0131lan yap\u0131y\u0131 ortaya\nkoymaya giri\u015fir -onun etik g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fc ortaya koymada s\u0131k\u00e7a insan g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcne\nba\u015fvurulmas\u0131n\u0131n nedeni de budur. Kant eti\u011finin fenomene uygun bir etik\nolmas\u0131n\u0131n nedeni de budur. Zira Kant\u2019\u0131n eti\u011finde yap\u0131lmaya \u00e7al\u0131\u015f\u0131lan,\nahlakl\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131n kurgu olmay\u0131p, olandan hareketle olabilirli\u011finin g\u00f6sterilmesidir.\nBu nedenle Kant eti\u011finin, hem geni\u015f anlamda eti\u011fin temellerinin g\u00f6sterilmesi,\nyani bir ahlak metafizi\u011finin \u2013 yani etikte sentetik a priori <\/em>yarg\u0131lar\u0131n- olanakl\u0131 oldu\u011funun ortaya konulmas\u0131, hem de\nher tek ki\u015fiye etik eylemde bulunmas\u0131n\u0131n m\u00fcmk\u00fcn oldu\u011funun \u2013ayn\u0131 zamanda bunun\nbir y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fck oldu\u011funun- g\u00f6sterilmesi oldu\u011fu s\u00f6ylenebilir. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

KAYNAK\u00c7A<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Geier, Manfred\n(2009), Kant\u2019\u0131n D\u00fcnyas\u0131<\/em>, \u00e7ev. Erol\n\u00d6zbek, \u0130stanbul: \u0130leti\u015fim Yay\u0131nlar\u0131.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

H\u00f6ffe, Otfried\n(1983), Immanuel Kant<\/em>, M\u00fcnih: C. H.\nBeck Verlag.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

H\u00f6ffe,\nOtfried, (2012), Kant\u2019s Kritik der\nPraktischen Vernunft Eine Philosophie der Freiheit<\/em>, M\u00fcnih: C. H. Beck\nVerlag.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Kant, Immanuel\n(1980), Pratik Akl\u0131n Ele\u015ftirisi<\/em>, \u00c7ev.\n\u0130oanna Ku\u00e7uradi, \u00dclker G\u00f6kberk, F\u00fcsun Akatl\u0131, Ankara: Hacettepe \u00dcniversitesi\nYay\u0131nlar\u0131.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Kant, Immanuel\n(1982), Ahlak Metafizi\u011finin Temellendirilmesi<\/em>,\n\u00c7ev. \u0130oanna Ku\u00e7uradi, Ankara: Hacettepe \u00dcniversitesi Yay\u0131nlar\u0131.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Kant, Immanuel (1996), The Metaphysics of Morals<\/em>, Mary Gregor\n(ed.), Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Tepe, Harun\n(2016), \u201cG\u00fcn\u00fcm\u00fcz Sorunlar\u0131 Kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131nda Kant Eti\u011fi\u201d, Teorik Etik<\/em> Eti\u011fin Bilgisel\nSorunlar\u0131,<\/em> Ankara: BilgeSu Yay\u0131nlar\u0131.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Tepe, Harun\n(2020), \u201cKant Eti\u011finde \u2018Akl\u0131n Olgusu\u2019\u201d, Pasajlar\nSosyal Bilimler Dergisi<\/em>, Say\u0131 6, ss.59-75.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Wood, Allen W.\n(1999), Kant\u2019s Ethical Thought<\/em>,\nCambridge: Cambridge University Press. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Wood, Allen,\nW. (2008), Kantian Ethics<\/em>, Cambridge:\nCambridge University Press.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Wood, Allen W.\n(2009), Kant<\/em>, \u00c7ev. Aliye Kovanl\u0131kaya,\nAnkara: Dost Kitabevi.
<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n\n\n\n

[1]<\/a>\nT\u00fcrkiye Kant Toplulu\u011fu Web Sayfas\u0131 i\u00e7in kaleme al\u0131nan bu\nyaz\u0131 daha \u00f6nce Kant eti\u011fi \u00fczerine yay\u0131nlanan \u00e7al\u0131\u015fmalar\u0131mdan da yararlan\u0131larak\nhaz\u0131rlanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

*This article is written in Turkish. Author: Harun Tepe Kant eti\u011fini anlatt\u0131\u011f\u0131m ders ve konu\u015fmalar\u0131ma \u00e7o\u011funlukla bu soruyla ba\u015flar\u0131m. Bunun da \u00e7ok yal\u0131n ve s\u0131k\u00e7a tekrarlad\u0131\u011f\u0131m bir yan\u0131t\u0131 vard\u0131r: Kant eti\u011finin g\u00fcnl\u00fck ya\u015fam\u0131m\u0131zda bizim de rahats\u0131z oldu\u011fumuz, etik bir sorun olarak g\u00f6rd\u00fc\u011f\u00fcm\u00fcz \u015feyi kuramla\u015ft\u0131rm\u0131\u015f olmas\u0131d\u0131r. Kant eti\u011fi bir anlamda malumun ilan\u0131 gibidir. Bu nedenle, etik …<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":5824,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"spay_email":""},"categories":[89],"tags":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/i1.wp.com\/turkiyekanttoplulugu.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/WhatsApp-Image-2021-04-11-at-14.21.45.jpg?fit=733%2C540","_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/turkiyekanttoplulugu.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5852"}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/turkiyekanttoplulugu.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/turkiyekanttoplulugu.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/turkiyekanttoplulugu.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/turkiyekanttoplulugu.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=5852"}],"version-history":[{"count":4,"href":"http:\/\/turkiyekanttoplulugu.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5852\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":5939,"href":"http:\/\/turkiyekanttoplulugu.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5852\/revisions\/5939"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/turkiyekanttoplulugu.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/5824"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/turkiyekanttoplulugu.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=5852"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/turkiyekanttoplulugu.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=5852"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/turkiyekanttoplulugu.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=5852"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}