https://revistes.uab.cat/enrahonar/article/view/v25-medina.

Trobar la forma d’expressar quelcom per al qual no hi ha paraules fou un dels reptes que assumí Levi quan volgué explicar la cruel deshumanització que va sofrir com a presoner al Lager. Nogensmenys, hi va trobar la solució mitjançant el concepte d’animal. En aquest sentit, el seu testimoni és ple de metàfores faunístiques que representen el patiment de la seua reducció cap al fons i la crueltat de ser tractat com una bèstia a la qual podien assassinar i (...) que patia com un esclau castigat. Levi confirma amb les seues analogies que la deshumanització és una metamorfosi animal. Tanmateix, la tesi d’aquest assaig és que la deshumanització no és convertir-se en una bèstia, sinó transformar-se en allò que nosaltres hem fet dels animals. Una proposició que afirmem gràcies a l’etologia, que ens evidencia que el comportament real de les feres no equival a estar pres ni a ser humiliat. De fet, creiem que la raó principal per la qual Primo Levi pensava que la deshumanització era animalitzar-se sorgeix arran d’una ideologia antropocèntrica. (shrink)

https://revistes.uab.cat/enrahonar/article/view/v55-shapshay-ferrell.

En aquest article s¿analitzen els continguts i perspectives que es varen desenvolupar en el decurs del Diàleg Interacció del Fòrum Universal de les Cultures 2004. En concret, aquells que giraren entorn la problemàtica del desenvolupament cultural i de la seva relació/dependència respecte al desenvolupament econòmic en els àmbits locals, dins el marc d¿un món globalitzat. La proposta del Diàleg tenia com a objectiu analitzar les vinculacions entre ambdós àmbits per tal de potenciar noves polítiques locals (que haurien de concretar-se en (...) l¿¿Agenda 21 de la Cultura¿) que potenciessin l¿àmbit cultural, desubstantivat i banalitzat en favor de l¿àmbit econòmic. L¿anàlisi de les diferents categories i perspectives que es varen posar a debat, nogensmenys, ens aboca a un tractament realitzat i desenvolupat des dels paràmetres de l¿àmbit econòmic i, per tant, de caire més aviat descripitiu que prescriptiu. Les possibilitats de potenciar l¿àmbit cultural tot romanent dins una lògica economicista queden així reduïdes a la mera constatació de l¿existència de múltiples pràctiques que queden subsumides en el mercat, i amb les que hom s¿hi relaciona com a mercaderies. (shrink)

Al llibre ¿Què ens fa humans? (2022), Salvador Macip explora la pregunta del títol a través d’un diàleg fructífer entre la ciència i la filosofia. Ara bé, Macip diu que no està interessat en tota la filosofia, sinó només en «la part de la filosofia que ha aplicat el mètode científic » (p. 159). A quina part de la filosofia fa referència exactament? Repassarem les idees principals del llibre de Macip fent especial esment dels filòsofs que es mencionen. Així, (...) podrem tenir una idea més precisa de quina mena de filosofia és la que interessa a Macip. També revisarem breument les referències artístiques incloses al llibre de Macip, ja que el mateix autor afirma que «ciència i art no s’haurien de veure com dues entitats separades (i gairebé antagòniques) […], sinó com components del mateix concepte, el de la cultura humana» (p. 35). (shrink)

El més gran dels pensadors i el més petit dels homes”; amb aquestes paraules va referir-se Gadamer d'una manera molt punyent a la desconcertant figura del seu mestre, Martin Heidegger. L’autor d’Ésser i temps ens ha deixat en herència no només una obra filosòfica capaç d’exercir una grandíssima influència, sinó també el repte d’interpretar la tensió entre vida i pensament. Hem de creure que cal una gran vida per tal que hi hagi un gran pensament? O hem d’admetre que (...) no hi ha cap relació entre una cosa i l’altra i, per tant, que un gran pensador pot adherir-se de forma entusiasta a un dels règims polítics més abjectes de la història d’Europa sense comprometre la qualitat de la seva producció filosòfica? Heidegger és segurament un exponent d'una Europa contradictòria i angoixant: no només un representant excepcional de la millor tradició filosòfica, sinó també de les grans bogeries i pors del segle XX. (shrink)

Qualsevol que es llegeixi aquest llibre s'adonarà que molts d'aquests mites amb els quals ens han promès la felicitat no són ni tan sòlids, ni tan certs, ni tan "progres" com sembla. Amb lúcida ironia, Ignasi Riera reflexiona sobre algunes de les qüestions que actualment saturen els mitjans de comunicació i que, com a polític i periodista, l'han preocupat al llarg de la seva vida: la idealització del món rural, l'obsessió per la salut, però també el maniqueisme de certes actituds (...) pseudodemocràtiques, les paradoxes de la societat del benestar o el fals esquerrisme. La crítica de fons és doblement interessant: marcada pel to satíric i desenfadat que el caracteritza, Riera ens proposa la deconstrucció d'un concepte viciat com és el de la felicitat, enganyós, mercantil i utilitari, i d'aquestes formes de pensament dirigit que, segons ens diuen alguns, són el camí per arribar-hi. La conclusió és clara: els que pretenem lluitar contra la felicitat, hem de canviar de sentit tota la nostra vida així com el conjunt de les nostres creences: tirar al foc moltes de les que semblen veritats eternes.IGNASI RIERA, escriptor, articulista, comentarista radiofònic i polític, ha conreat tots els gèneres literaris. Ha estat guardonat amb els premis Octubre, Ramon Llull i Pere Quart d'Humor i Sàtira. És autor de llibres de narrativa breu, de novel·les, de pamflets, dels llibres de no ficció: El meu oncle Pere Quart, Un patriota exemplar, Els catalans de Franco, Viatgers de Barcelona, Jordi Pujol. Llums i ombres ; de la biografia, Lluís Llach: companys no és això i de Llibre d'hores del ben menjar. A Edicions 62 ha publicat: Pàries, sindicalistes, demagogs, Diccionari de la Cuina Catalana i Un català a Madrid. (shrink)

https://revistes.uab.cat/enrahonar/article/view/v27-mccarthy.

Actualment en Filosofia, tenim dues caracteritzacions canóniques sobre la naturalesa de la Metafísica, la carnapiana i la quineana, tot i que són dues tesis diferenciades, ambdues coincideixen en que la Metafísica és reduïda a qüestions d'existència. No obstant, Kathrin Koslicki considera que aquestes caracteritzacions de la naturalesa de la Metafísica són errònies i que comporten una crítica explícita a la Metafísica o redueixen la resolució dels problemes metafísics a un pragmatisme. Per això, Koslicki considerant que els desacords metafísics són legítims (...) i profunds, tenint com a marc de referència la filosofia aristotèlica, considera que la tesi quineana i carnapiana no reflecteixen bé la naturalesa de la Metafísica, ja que, hi ha disputes metafísiques que es deuen a disputes no-existencials sobre temes de fonamentabilitat. Koslicki considera que la Metafísica no pot ésser reduïda a qüestions d'existència, sinó que ha de ser pensada com la reflexió de quines entitats són fonamentals, i quines són derivades d'aquestes. L'article està dividit en una primera part introductòria sobre els meus objectius, seguit d'una breu exposició de les tesis carnapiana i quineana de la metafísica, i per últim l'exposició de la proposta neo-aristotèlica de Koslicki. (shrink)

Raimon Panikkar és, sens dubte, un dels pensadors que més ha contribuït a la reflexió sobre el pluralisme i la interculturalitat, uns conceptes que van molt més enllà de la mera tolerància, d’un relativisme banal o d’un multiculturalisme fàcil. Malgrat la set de comprensió universal, Panikkar considera que no hi ha ni pot haver-hi una única perspectiva humana universal: hi ha invariants humanes, però no hi ha universals culturals. És a dir: tothom menja, és actiu i descansa, però el sentit (...) que es dóna a l’aliment, a la feina i al repòs és molt diferent segons les cultures. I és que tota cultura humana representa d’una manera peculiar i limitada la possible gamma sencera de l’experiència humana en determinades condicions concretes. La persona pluralista fa falsos tots els absolutismes, tots els fanatismes i tots els reduccionismes. (shrink)

En la gran producció filosòfica d’Eusebi Colomer, s’hi poden distingir tres grans centres d’interès particularment destacats. En primer lloc, la seva dedicació a l’estudi del pensament de Ramon Llull i de Nicolau de Cusa. La seva tesi doctoral va mostrar les influències lul·lianes en l’obra de Nicolau de Cusa a partir de les anotacions autògrafes en què el jove Nicolau es feia ressò de les coses que més li interessaven de Llull. El segon gran centre d’interès el van constituir, naturalment, (...) els grans corrents de la filosofia alemanya moderna i contemporània. Des dels anys d’estudiant s’havia familiaritzat particularment amb l’idealisme, la fenomenologia i la filosofia de l’existència. Finalment, el seu tercer centre d’interès va ser el diàleg filosòfico-teològic. Colomer lamentava profundament el divorci produït entre la filosofia i la teologia. Adaptant una coneguda formulació de Kant, pensava que la teologia sense filosofia és cega, però que la filosofia sense teologia és buida. Format en la tradició metafísica espiritualista i defensor de l’humanisme cristià, Colomer es trobava, però, a les antípodes de qualsevol sectarisme o dogmatisme. La seva formació, el seu tarannà i, segurament, els seus enormes coneixements de la història de la filosofia, li havien conferit una gran capacitat per al diàleg. Ell no veia el diàleg com un recurs o com una tàctica, sinó com un element constitutiu de l’ésser humà. \n. (shrink)

Theodor W. Adorno construeix la modernitat com la fase final d'un procés d'emancipació que ha conduït justament al contrari del que es pretenia. L'alliberament del mite ha portat a una situació històrica en la qual l'encobriment ideològic del món és total. Això té conseqüències per a un pensament que vol ser crític, ja que haurà de trobar un lloc des d'on es pugui interpretar la història per tal de salvar la veritat d'un possible món diferent. En el moment (...) de màxima ocultació ideològica i de màxim absurd -és conegut que Adorno es refereix al món contemporani com al temps després d'Auschwitz- Adorno intentarà entendre què ha passat amb aquest subjecte que s'ha preocupat excessivament per la seva identitat. Mitjançant l'aplicació del model psicoanalític d'interpretació a textos de Beckett i Kafka reconstruirà la història de l'emancipació fallida del subjecte modern. Amb aquestes interpretacions Adorno se situa no només molt a prop de la pràctica psicoanalítica, sinó també de la tradició hermenèutica clàssica. (shrink)

Theodor W. Adorno construeix la modernitat com la fase final d'un procés d'emancipació que ha conduït justament al contrari del que es pretenia. L'alliberament del mite ha portat a una situació històrica en la qual l'encobriment ideològic del món és total. Això té conseqüències per a un pensament que vol ser crític, ja que haurà de trobar un lloc des d'on es pugui interpretar la història per tal de salvar la veritat d'un possible món diferent. En el moment (...) de màxima ocultació ideològica i de màxim absurd -és conegut que Adorno es refereix al món contemporani com al temps després d'Auschwitz- Adorno intentarà entendre què ha passat amb aquest subjecte que s'ha preocupat excessivament per la seva identitat. Mitjançant l'aplicació del model psicoanalític d'interpretació a textos de Beckett i Kafka reconstruirà la història de l'emancipació fallida del subjecte modern. Amb aquestes interpretacions Adorno se situa no només molt a prop de la pràctica psicoanalítica, sinó també de la tradició hermenèutica clàssica. (shrink)

Després del centre de El polític, dedicat a la justa mesura, el diàleg imposa el «retorn al polític» i ja no se separarà més d’aquesta comesa. Es procedirà, en primer lloc a depurar les arts concausants; després se separaran les diferents menes de servidors de la ciutat, per tal d’arribar a veure que els rivals del polític conformen un conjunt de difícil separació. Caldrà, abans de prosseguir amb la divisió, atendre als tipus de règim polític per veure quin paper hi (...) juga el saber polític. El resultat d’aquest primer moment del retorn al polític pren la figura de la descoberta dels fonaments de la ciutat. (shrink)

https://revistes.uab.cat/enrahonar/article/view/v37-tobin.

Tercer i últim volum de les memòries lliures i impertinents d’un dels filòsofs i educadors més influents de Catalunya En els dos primers volums de les seves memòries, el filòsof i pedagog Octavi Fullat s’ha revelat per a molts lectors com un dels intel·lectuals de referència del segle XX català. El seu estil, hereu de la profunda senzillesa d’Albert Camus, combina de manera inconfusible la memòria, l’assaig i la narració. Després de La meva llibertat i La meva veritat , en (...) aquest tercer i últim volum Octavi Fullat ens condueix pels secrets de l’art i la bellesa: l’emoció que pot despertar el cos d’una dona, la conversa a l’entorn d’un diàleg platònic acompanyat amb un bon vi francès o la rememoració d’una màgica nit africana. Per les pàgines d’aquest llibre hi transiten pensadors com Schopenhauer o Hegel, pintors com Van Gogh o Tintoretto, escriptors com Dante o Rilke, músics com Mozart o Beethoven i, com calia esperar, punyents al·lusions al nostre país i als seus polítics. Així, es tanca l’obra més personal d’un home que mai no ha buscat recer i que sempre ha viscut per la llibertat, per la veritat i per la bellesa. Compra La meva bellesa en E-book Web d'Octavi Fullat Octavi Fullat Nascut a Alforja (Baix Camp) el 1928, és doctor en Filosofia per la Universitat de Barcelona i catedràtic de Filosofia de l’Educació de la Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona des de 1986. Ha rebut diversos premis i, des de 1996, és membre numerari de l’Institut d’Estudis Catalans. Ha estat deixeble de Lévi-Strauss, Michel Foucault i Jean Wahl, i doctor honoris causa a Mèxic i Xile. Ha impartit cursos a diferents universitats d’Europa i Amèrica. Ha estat president del Consell Escolat de Catalunya i del Consell Superior d’Avaluació del Sistema Educatiu de Catalunya. És autor de nombrosos estudis sobre pedagogia, filosofia, ètica, antropologia i història, entre els quals destaquen, La moral atea de Albert Camus (1963), Marx y la religión (1974), Filosofías de la educación (1992), Política de la educación (1994), Antropología y Educación (1997), Els valors d’Occident (2001), El siglo postmoderno (1900-2001) (2002), L’autèntic origen dels europeus (2005), La meva llibertat (2006) i La meva veritat (2008), aquests dos últims publicats per Angle Editorial. (shrink)

“Pero la cuestión que quiero plantear es la siguiente: ¿no es suficiente con tener este yo psíquico y psicofísico? ¿Necesitamos añadirle un yo trascendental, como una estructura de la conciencia absoluta?” Sartre planteó esta cuestión en su célebre ensayo La trascendencia del ego. Ella enuncia la concepción básica de la fenomenología no-egológica, la cual no niega la existencia misma del ego o del sujeto, sino más bien lo concibe como un ser constituido y mundano, como trascendente respecto del ámbito de (...) la conciencia. En la presente ponencia me gustaría mostrar por qué la fenomenología no puede prescindir de la noción del ego trascendental. Con tal propósito, consideraré de cerca la noción husserliana del “yo puro” del primer y del segundo libro de Ideas y, a grandes rasgos, el concepto general que Husserl se hace sobre el yo “fenomenológico” y “yo trascendental”. Tal concepto se puede encontrar en los manuscritos de este periodo, así como en algunos textos más tardíos. Intentaré demostrar que la noción husserliana del ego trascendental propia de este periodo podría articularse como una respuesta satisfactoria o al menos plausible, al desafío no-egológico con el que se ve confrontada la fenomenología egológica de Husserl.“But the question I would like to raise is the following: is this psychical and psycho-physical me not sufficient? Do we need to add to it a transcendental I, as a structure of absolute consciousness?” – Sartre raised this question in his famous essay, The transcen-dence of the ego. This is the basic conception of non-egological phenomenology, which latter does not deny the very existence of ego or subject, but regards it as a constituted, worldly being, something which is transcendent concerning the domain of consciousness. In this lecture I would like to demonstrate the thesis, why phenomenology cannot get along without the concept of a transcendental ego. I will have a closer look on Husserl’s notion of “pure I” in the first and second book of Ideas, and more generally on Husserl’s overall concept of “phenomenological” or “transcendental I” that could be found in the manuscripts of this period and little after. I will try to show that Husserl’s conception of transcendental ego that one could find in this period could be articulated as successful or at least plausible answer to the non-egological challenge of Husserl’s egological phenomenology. (shrink)

(Spanish) RESUMEN: La libertad absoluta postulada por Viktor Emil Frankl y Jean-Paul Sartre, la Shoah y la creencia en un dios omnipotente, bueno y justo parecen contradecirse. La pregunta por el sentido del sufrimiento de las víctimas del Holocausto (la verdadera catástrofe, el mayor crimen contra la humanidad), simbolizado por Auschwitz, y como punto de inflexión en la historia, es terriblemente dolorosa y parece no tener una respuesta filosófica ni teológica. A mi juicio, es importantísimo distinguir entre las víctimas inocentes (...) de la Shoah que perecieron y las víctimas inocentes que sufrieron un verdadero infierno y perdieron a sus seres queridos, pero que lograron sobrevivir. Ambas son víctimas, por supuesto, pero así como encontrarle un posible sentido al sufrimiento de las víctimas masacradas y gaseadas podría suponer un insulto a su sufrimiento y agonía –en especial, al horror que sufrieron los niños–, el horrible sufrimiento de los supervivientes pudo dar, tal vez, de alguna manera, un sentido a sus vidas después de la liberación de los campos de concentración y exterminio, ya fuera como voz, como protesta o como simple supervivencia. Frankl apuesta por un sentido último (que abraza el sentido del sufrimiento de las víctimas), y Sartre, aunque parezca no apostar por sentido alguno, volcó su vida al compromiso político después de la Segunda Guerra Mundial, y ello parece vislumbrar una minúscula pizca de sentido después de la barbarie. La filosofía de Frankl es un sí a la vida incluso en las situaciones más extremas, un grito casi nietzscheano que exalta el valor de la vida más allá de cualquier sufrimiento. Frankl, padre de la logoterapia y superviviente del Holocausto, abre una puerta a Dios al hablar de un dios inconsciente, una dimensión suprahumana y una fe incondicional, y define la religión como espiritualidad y como la búsqueda del hombre por el sentido último. Según Frankl, la libertad no se contradice con Dios, y la religión existe no a raíz de la barbarie, sino a pesar de la barbarie. El existencialismo sartreano es una filosofía de la libertad radical y de la responsabilidad. El hombre está condenado a ser libre. El ser humano es un ser en el que la existencia precede a la esencia. Somos totalmente responsables de lo que somos. Sartre afirma que la libertad humana es incompatible con Dios. En un mundo sin Dios, la moral la construyen los hombres, con sus propias decisiones y sus acciones, y la existencia y el sufrimiento de las víctimas no tienen sentido alguno. Sartre define al hombre como libertad, responsabilidad, angustia y contingencia. Frankl define al hombre como libertad, responsabilidad, espiritualidad y búsqueda de sentido. Con esta tesis me propongo entrar en la resbaladiza dimensión del dolor, la desesperación, el sentido y sinsentido del sufrimiento de las víctimas (teniendo presente los horrores de Auschwitz, que en teología y filosofía ha simbolizado desde la liberación de los campos la muerte de Dios y la muerte de la moral). Es verdad que no solo los hombres, mujeres y niños judíos fueron víctimas de la barbarie alemana, pero, como reza el mensaje de Elie Wiesel en la exposición permanente del Block 27 del Auschwitz-Birkeanu State Museum: "Not all victims were Jewish in this place, but all Jews were victims". La Shoah no es un episodio dentro de la Segunda Guerra Mundial, sino un punto de inflexión en la historia de la humanidad, y es una catástrofe que nos concierne a todos, hombres y mujeres judíos y no judíos, religiosos e irreligiosos, creyentes e increyentes, como seres libres, responsables y morales que somos –o que deberíamos ser. Muchas de las víctimas del Holocausto, en medio de la desesperación, entraron en las cámaras de gas orando, aferrándose a la esperanza de que ese final espeluznante no era un punto final. Con esta tesis no me propongo de ninguna manera responder a la eterna pregunta de si Dios existe o no, sino que propongo interpretar ese grito hacia Dios como un desesperado anhelo de esperanza. También me propongo encontrar una coherencia en las posturas de estos dos grandes pensadores para quienes la libertad y la responsabilidad definen al hombre: Frankl (quien apuesta por una dimensión suprahumana donde existe un sentido último en el que el sufrimiento de las víctimas tiene que tener algún sentido, aunque ese sentido sea completamente incomprensible en la dimensión humana) y Sartre (el existencialista ateo por excelencia, para quien el mundo, la existencia y el sufrimiento son absolutamente contingentes). En el primer capítulo expongo la logoterapia y el existencialismo sartreano: describo las tres dimensiones del hombre y las tres búsquedas de sentido propuestas por Frankl, y expongo las cinco consecuencias de "l'existence précède l'essence", centrándome en la libertad y la responsabilidad, y hablo del suicidio. El segundo capítulo está dedicado al dios inconsciente frankleano, la dimensión suprahumana, la búsqueda por el sentido último y la fe incondicional. En el tercer capítulo ilustro la libertad sin Dios sartreana, la ontología sartreana, el ateísmo sartreano y el humanismo sartreano, y hablo sobre la responsabilidad, la mauvaise foi, la contingencia, la situation y la angustia. El cuarto capítulo es necesariamente histórico (sin dejar de ser filosófico): me pregunto por la muerte de Dios después de Auschwitz, argumento y defiendo la unicidad del Holocausto (la Shoah es un punto de inflexión en la historia de la humanidad), describo las masacres antes de los campos de exterminio (Einsatzgruppen, Ordnungspolizei y Wehrmacht), el gigantesco complejo de Auschwitz (Stammlager, Auschwitz-Birkenau y Monowitz-Buna), reflexiono sobre Dios y el mal (centrándome en los niños de Auschwitz), describo los días de Frankl en Auschwitz, hablo de Dios como esperanza, de la inmortalidad y la escatología, de la crueldad de Dios, de la relación entre el cristianismo y el antisemitismo, del islam y el antisemitismo, critico el silencio de Dios, hablo de la muerte de Dios y del juicio contra Dios. En el quinto capítulo expongo la moral frankleana (una moral que atañe al hombre y no a Dios), basándome en su teoría del amor y en su única obra de teatro (Synchronisation in Binkerwald), y la moral sartreana (una moral que atañe a una humanidad sin Dios), recordando a Dostoyevsky, analizando la famosa cita de Garcin en Huis clos "L'enfer, c'est les Autres", criticando el marxismo de Sartre y cuestionando (con la mirada de Frankl y Sartre) el verso de Brecht "Erst kommt das Fressen, dann kommt die Moral"; al final del capítulo incluyo una reflexión propia y las críticas frankleana y sartreana sobre la impunidad de los verdugos y colaboradores después del Holocausto (con el permiso de Dios). Después de la Conclusión, añado un Apéndice sobre las vidas de Frankl y Sartre, para poder entender mejor su obra. PALABRAS CLAVE: logoterapia, existencialismo sartreano, búsqueda de sentido, libertad, responsabilidad, moral, angustia, sufrimiento, supervivientes, víctimas, contingencia, espiritualidad, religión, Dios, esperanza, antisemitismo, culpa, Auschwitz, Holocausto, Shoah. /// (English) ABSTRACT: The absolute freedom defended by Viktor Emil Frankl and Jean-Paul Sartre, the Shoah and the belief in an omnipotent, benevolent and just God seem to contradict each other. The question of the meaning of the victims' suffering of the Holocaust (the true catastrophe, the biggest crime against humanity), simbolised by Auschwitz and as a turning point in History, is terribly painful and doesn't seem to have an answer. In my opinion, it's crucial to distinguish between the innocent victims of the Shoah who perished and the innocent victims who sufferend a real hell and lost their loved ones, but managed to survive. Both are victims, of course, but just as finding a possible meaning to the suffering of the massacred and gassed victims could result in an insult to their suffering and agony –especially to the horror that the children suffered– the gigantic suffering of the survivors could, maybe, somehow, give a meaning to their lives after the liberation of the concentration and extermination camps, either as a voice, as a protest, or as a simple survival. Frankl believes in an ultimate meaning (that embraces the meaning of the victims' suffering), and Sartre, even if it appears not to embrace any meaning, turned his life to political engagement after War World II, and that attitude seems to give a tiny glimpse of meaning after the barbarity. Frankl's philosophy says yes to life even in the most extreme situations, and it's a Nietzschean-like scream that exalts the value of life beyond any monstrous suffering. Frankl, the father of logotherapy and a Holocaust survivor, opens a door to God when he talks about an unconscious God, a supra-human dimension and an unconditional faith; he defines religion as spirituality and as man's search for ultimate meaning. According to Frankl, freedom is not contradictory with God, and religion exists not because of the barbarity but in spite of the barbarity. Sartrean existentialism is a philosophy of radical freedom and responsibility. Men are condemned to be free. We are beings where the existence precedes the essence. We are completely responsible of what we are. Sartre argues that human freedom is incompatible with God. In a godless world, morality is constructed by people, with their own choices and actions, and human existence and the suffering of the victims don't have any meaning. Sartre defines man as freedom, responsibility, Angst and contingency. Frankl defines man as freedom, responsibility, spirituality and search for meaning. With this dissertation I attempt to enter in the slippery dimension of the pain, despair, meaning and meaninglessness of the victims' suffering (having in mind the horrors of Auschwitz, that in theology and in philosophy have simbolised, since the liberation of the camps, the death of God and the death of morality). It's true that not only Jewish men, women and children were victims of the German barbarity, but, as Elie Wiesel's message from the permanent exhibition from Block 27 of the Auschwitz-Birkeanu State Museum reads: "Not all victims were Jewish in this place, but all Jews were victims". The Shoah is not an episode inside War World II, but a turning point in the history of humankind, and a catastrophe that embraces us all, Jewish and not not Jewish men and women, religious and not religious, believers and not believers, as the free, responsible and moral beings that we all are –or that we should be. A lot of the victims, in the midst of their desperation, entered into the gas chambers praying, holding to the hope that their horrifying end was not the ultimate end. With this dissertation I do not attempt to answer the eternal question of the existence of God, rather, I will try to interpret that scream to God as a longing for hope. I also intend to find a coherence between the thought of these two great thinkers for whom freedom and responsibilty define man: Frankl (who argues that there is a suprahuman dimension where an ultimate meaning exists and where the victims' suffering has to have a meaning, even if this meaning is completely incomprehensible in the human dimension) and Sartre (the atheist existentialist par excellence, for whom the world, human existence and suffering are absolutely contingent). In the first chapter I expose logotherapy and Sartrean existentialism: I describe the three dimensions of man, the three searches for meaning, the five consequences of "l'existence précède l'essence" and I speak about suicide. The second chapter delves into the unconscious God, the supra-human dimension, the ultimate meaning and the unconditional faith. In the third chapter I expose the freedom without God defended by Sartre, Sartre's ontology, Sartre's atheism, Sartre's humanism, and his ideas about responsibility, mauvaise foi, contingency, situation, and Angst. The fourth chapter is necessarily historical (while being philosophical too): I wonder about the death of God after Auschwitz, I argue and defend the uniqueness of the Holocaust (the Shoah is a turning point in the history of humankind), I describe the massacres before the extermination camps (Einsatzgruppen, Ordnungspolizei y Wehrmacht), the gigantic Auschwitz camp complex (Stammlager, Auschwitz-Birkenau y Monowitz-Buna), I reflect on God and evil (focusing on the children of Auschwitz), I describe Frankl's days in Auschwitz, I talk about God as hope, about immortality and escathology, I discuss God's cruelty, the relationship between Christianity and antisemitism and Islam and antisemitism, I question the silence of God, and I talk about the death of God and about the trial against God. In the fifth chapter I talk about the Franklean morality (a morality that concerns man and not God), on the basis of his love theory and his only work of theater (Synchronisation in Binkerwald), and the Sartrean morality (a morality that concerns a humanity without God), remembering Dostoyevsky, analysing Garcin's famous quote in Huis clos "L'enfer, c'est les Autres", crticizing Sartre's marxism and questioning (with Frankl's and Sartre's eyes) Brecht's verse "Erst kommt das Fressen, dann kommt die Moral"; at the end of the chapter I include my own reflection (and Frankl and Sartre's critique) about the impunity of the executioners and collaborators after the Holocaust (with God's permission). After the Conclusion, I add an Appendix about the lives of Frankl and Sartre, which helps understanding better their work. KEYWORDS: logotherapy, existentialism, search for meaning, freedom, responsibility, morality, Angst, suffering, survivors, victims, contingency, spirituality, religion, God, hope, antisemitism, guilt, Auschwitz, Holocaust, Shoah. (shrink)

INTRODUCTION BY NANCY FUMERO What is a translation that stalls comprehension? That, when read, parsed, obfuscates comprehension through any language – English, Portuguese. It is inevitable that readers expect fidelity from translations. That language mirror with a sort of precision that enables the reader to become of another location, condition, to grasp in English in a similar vein as readers of Portuguese might from João Guimarães Rosa’s GRANDE SERTÃO: VEREDAS. There is the expectation that translations enable mobility. That what was (...) written in one language be accessible in another. And that a translator is to serve as a mediator, acting ultimately in service to ideas within the source text. To disperse them. However, this notion of translation is partly antithetical to the ideas in Rosa’s work. Or, alternately, to convey the despair of terrain slipping beneath one’s feet, and to encounter the heightened suspense of magic, the translation, as part of its strategy, cannot devotedly rely on its original language, not as its source text. The work undertaken by Felipe W.Martinez is a new form of translation that risks everything in order to encounter the same treacherous knowing Rosa had traversed. And it takes its risks by not taking risks: by being, almost word for word, a literal translation. This is an approach that reductively converts, as opposed to translates. The idiomatic differences between English and Portuguese are not accented. The syntax is not finessed. Liberties are not assumed on account of improving readability. What stands, resoundingly amid such absences, is the awakened challenge of reading. The genuine peril of not knowing. That is, this translation, one that purports to know nothing, creates access into the guileful world Rosa had created in Portuguese. But not by translating. If anything, GRANDE SERTÃO: VEREDAS is speaking a cosmic language through a linguistic one. And W.Martinez does us the service of recognizing this, as what configures the shapes of words and sentences is not as simple as neologisms, portmanteaus, and digressions, but as terrifying as the path the fool traverses: all paths. As such, this translation doesn’t speak English, just as the original does not speak Portuguese. It is the assemblage of paradox as a new logic that can be navigated, if only one could suspend the comfort of readability, of expectation. If one could descend a mountain in the pitch dark of night, each step shocking the body, unable to acclimate to the unleveled heights. Without a doubt, the translation is incongruous to the Portuguese. Taking a small excerpt to compare: Eh, well, thereafter, the rest the Sir provide: comes the bread, comes the hand, comes the god, comes the dog. What is striking is the interplay between “god” and “dog”. To most English speakers, this anagram is a familiar one. But in Portuguese the words god (“deus”) and dog (“cão”) are not so closely linked. In fact, there is no direct mention of “deus” in Rosa’s text: Eh, pois, empós, o resto o senhor prove: vem o pão, vem a mão, vem o são, vem o cão. Both are fascinating. In Rosa’s excerpt, the rhythm is unmistakable and precise, despite, of course, the indices of hesitation: the commas, the Eh, the uncomfortable way of searching through prolongation and wait. This is the sort of paradox Rosa can engage within a sentence. W.Martinez’s does this as well, at a scale that reverberates beyond the sentence, and with one noticeable addition: deus. What may appear to be an overstep, to add such a weighted word that draws out wordplay but is, nevertheless, not in the source text, is exemplary of risk. The translation buzzes because of it. This is because throughout the text we encounter dogs frequently, as some primal beast on par with humans. The dog is one that masters and can be mastered. A creature that is at times its face, and at others a mask. It is a powerful presence. For the translator to be attuned to the reverent undercurrent attributed to this animal, and create within the translation such charged play in English from what was only an implication in Portuguese, is in tribute to the grand beauty within dissonance. What aberrant modes of writing and translation can teach us most assuredly, is that things, words, are not in states of rightness or wrongness, but of oscillation. This isn’t so different from what Rosa says himself: The Sir look…see: the most important and beautiful, of the world, is this: that the people are not always same, still were not completed — but that they go always shifting. They tune or detune. We find this so readily in W.Martinez’s translation, this tuning and detuning. Nancy Fumero Los Angeles GRAND SERTÃO: VEREDAS BY JOÃO GUIMARÃES ROSA TRANSLATED FROM THE PORTUGUESE BY FELIPE W.MARTINEZ Nonothing. Shots that the Sir heard were man brawling not, God be. Bleach white sights on the tree in the backyard, down in the river. By my right. I do this every day, I like; from the bad of boyhood. Thereof they came to call on me. Case of a calf: a white calf, errorful, eyes of to not be—saw selves—; and with a mask of a dog! They told me; I didn’t want to catch a sight. Same that, by the defects of birth, upturned lips, looked to be a laughing man. Folkface, dogface: they determined—it was the devil. Bananas. Killed it. Do not know who owned it. They came to borrow my guns. I caved. I’ve no power to impose. Oh, sir, you laugh certain laughs…Look: when it’s a true shot, first the dogs begin to bark, instantly—after, then, you see who’s handed death. Sir, endure, this is the Sertão. Some want that it is not: that situated Sertão is in and out of those general fields, they say, end of the road, highlands, the other Urucuia. Toleima. For those of Cortino and of Curvelo, then, isn’t here said Sertão? Ah! That there’s more! To place the Sertão it’s told: it’s where the pastures lack latches; where one can tear off ten, fifteen leagues without running into a houseinhabitant; where criminalousness lives out its christ jesus. Sifted out from the tightening grip of the law. The Urcuia comes from the western mountains. But today, its banks, give all—farmlands of farms, pastures of meadows of good yield, low tides, cultures that go kill for kill, until these virgins there are. The general fields run round. These general fields are without size. Ultimately, whichever one one approves, the Sir knows: bread or breads, it’s a question of heads…the Sertão is everywhere. Of the devi? No comment. Sir ask the dwellers. Falsely I fear they unspeak that name of his—only say: whatsitcalled. Volt! no… Whosoever over avoids it, lives with it. In the sentence of one Aristides—who exists in the first palm grove on the right hand side, called Vereda-of-Cow-Calm-of-Saint-Rita—everyone believes: he can't pass in three designated places: then can be heard the tiny cry, behind, a little voice warning:— "Here I come! Here I come!... "— that is the Capirote, the whatsitcalled... And one Jise Simplicio—who anyone from here will swear he keeps an imp in house, a little satanite, imprisoned and obliged to help in all greedful deeds; reason that Simplicio emprises en route to complete riches. As such, for this they say too that his beast bristles and refuses, denying his banner, unyielding, when he wishes to mount... Superstition. Jise Simplicio and Aristides, continue getting fatter, thence unheard or heard. Still the Sir study: right now, in these days of time, you have people purporting that the devil proper stopped, mid-passage, in Andrequice. A boy out of there, to whom'd appeared, and there lauded that, to get here—normally, by horse, a day-n-half—he was capable of such with only some twenty minutes enough... by coasting the River of Chico by the headwaters! Or, too, who knows—sans offense—will not have been, for example, even yourself the Sir who announced such, when you passed by there, for fun run funny? Thereof, not my given crime, I know that wasn't. And evil I wanted not. Only that one question, in hours, at times, brightens peaceful reason. But, the Sir understand: if such a boy, there was, he wanted to dupe. Because, hey, that, to cut the river off by the springs, would be the same thing as one redoubling in the internals of this our state of ours, costant of a journey of some three months... Then? Whatsitcalled? Dodo. The fantastication. And, the respect of giving him such these names of delicacy, is what it is for one to want to invoke that he form of form, with his presence! Not that is. I, personally, almost that have lost in him the creed, deserving to Deus; is the that to the Sir I say, to pure-secret. I know that it is well established, that it greases our Saintly-Gospels. On occasion, I conversed with a young seminarian, super suitable, conferring in the book of prayers and coated in vestments, with a stick of black-sage in hand—prosed that he went auxilitator to the father, to extract the Cujo, from the body living of an oldwoman, in Waterfalls-of-Bulls, he went with the vicar of Field-Round... I conceive. The Sir not is as I? I didn't believe a single thing. Compadre mine Quelemem describes that that which reveals effect are the low spirits meager, of third, adoing in the worst darkness and with anxieties of connecting selves with the livers—they give support. Compadre mine Quelemem is who much me consoles—Quelemem of Goias. But he has to live far from here, in Jijuja, Vereda of Buriti Dark... Ahrr, I leave myself there, that in enevildemonment or with support—the Sir too must have had known diverse, men, women. As not yes? For me, umpteen I've seen, that I've learned. Ma-Neigh, Blood-o'Other, or Legion-Lips, or Tear-em-Down, Cold-Cutter, or Sissy-Goat, one Treciziano, or Verdigris... or Hermogenes... o'them, pileload. If I could forget so many names... I'm not a man for calming horses! And, same, whom of yes of to be jagunço self enters, yea is for some competence entrant of demonion. Will it not? Will it? From first, I made and mixed, and to think not I thought. I didn't have the deadlines. I lived pulling difficult from difficult, fish alive on griddle: who lives asp'rously, no fantasies. But, now, fete of fate to me comes, and sans little disquietudes, I'm from creaky net. And myself invented in this like, of to speculate ideas. The devil exists and nonexists? I say the saying. Opennouncement. These melancholies. The Sir sees: exists waterfall; and since? But waterfall is gulch of ground, and water so pouring from it, retumbling; the Sir consume that water, or undo that bankment, remainder waterfall any? To live is negotiation much perilous. I explain to the Sir: the devil vigors inside of human, the wrinkles of human— or is the human ruin, or the human of adversess. I free, per se, citizen, is that not has devil notone. Notone!— is the that I say. The Sir approve? Me declares total, frank— is high merit that me make: and to beg might, increased. This case— by rashtravagance that me they see— is of mine certain importance. God grant not was... But, not say that the Sir, awised and instructed, that agrees in people of them?! Not? You I appreciate! Your high opinion composes my value. Yea I knew, waited for it— yea the field! Ah, a we, in oldness, we lack of to have plowing of rest. You I appreciate. Is devil notone. Nor esprit. Never I've seen. Someone ought to see, then was I myself, this your servant. Was I you to tell... Well, the devil regulate his state black, ins creatures, ins womens, ins humans. E'en: ins childrens— I declaim. Since not is said: "boy—trainee of the devil"? And ins thes uses, ins plants, ins waters, in terra, in wind... Manures. …The devil in the street, in the middle of the vortex... Hey? Hey? Ah. Figuration mine, of worse by back, the certain memories. Mal-make me! I suffer pain of to tell not…Meliorate, if chillingly: well, in a ground and with equal format of branches and leaves, not give to cassava-calm, that is eaten common, and the cassava-mad that kills? Now, the Sir yea saw a strangeness? A cassava-sweet can rapidly to turn agonizing— motives not I know, at times is said that is for replanted in the terrain always, with mutations then, of caules—go embittering, of s’much in s’much, of its self takes poisons. And, well look: the other, the cassava-mad, too is that at times can fix calm, the estimate, of is to eat sans notone mal. And what this is? Eh, the Sir yea saw, for to see, the ugliness of hate pleated, facetorqued, on the faces of one cobrarattlesnake? Observed the porker fat, capita day more felicity brute, capable of, could, snort and engulf for its own dirty coziness the world total? And sparrowhawk, blackbird, some, the features of they yea represent the need of cleave for before, rend and shred by beak, appears a knife much fine for ruin I desire. Total. Has even twisted races of stone, horrorous, venomous— that spoil mortal the aquas, if they are buried beneath of well; the devil inside of them sleeps: they are the devil. Is known? And the demon— that is only thus the significance of one mercury malign— have order of to follow the path of him, have license to brag?! Arr, he is variegated in all! What the what wastes, goes spending the devil of inside of the people, by itttybits, is the reasonable to suffer. And the delight of love—compadre mine Quelemem says. Family. Really? Is, and not is. The Sir think and not think. Total is and not is… Almost all more grave criminous ferocity, always is much good husband, good son, good father, and is good-friend-of-your-friends! I know of those. Solo that have the afters— and Deus, joined. I spy many nimbi. But, in veracity, son, too, softens. Look: one called Aleixo, resident a league from Step-of-Sour, in Of-Sand, was the man of major badness calm that yea you saw. Me agreed that near the house of his had a weir, amidst the palms, with traíras, for souls of enormous, desenormous, to the real, that received fame; the Aleixo gave of to eat to them, in hours just, they self accustomed to if assuch of lunacies, in order to gobble, seemed to be fishes instructed. One day, solo for grace rustic, he killed an oldman who by there passed, destitute begging alms. The Sir not doubt—have people, in this bored world, that kill solo in order to see someone make grimace… Eh, well, thereafter, the rest the Sir provide: comes the bread, comes the hand, comes the god, comes the dog. This Aleixo was man afamilied, had children small; they were the love of his, total, absurdity. Gave good, that not even a year there passed, of to killed the oldman poor, and the children of Aleixo there they asickened. Smallepidemic of measles, they said, but complex; they never heal. When, then, they healed. But the eyes of theirs vermillionized high in an inflame of spraining to rebellion; and nexthing— the that not I know is if they went of at once, or one later and later other and other— they remained blind. Blind, sans remission of one sweet of light of this Ours! The Sir imagine: stairset— three boys and one girl— all blind. Sans remediable. The Aleixo not lost the judgment, but he changed; ah, mutated complete— now lives of band of Deus, sweating to be good and charitous in all his hours of night and of day. Appears even that he fixed the felicity, that before not was. He himself says he was a man of luck, because Deus wanted to have pity of him, to transform for there the route of his soul. That I heard, and me it gave rage. Reason of the children. If being castigated, what culpa of the let-there-bes of Aleixo those little children had?! Compadre mine Quelemem reproved my uncertainties. That, for certain, inother life returnaound, the children too had been the most wicked, of the mass and part of the father, demons of the same kettle of place. Sir the what thinks? And the oldman, assassinated? — I know the Sir goes to discuss. Well, too. In order that he had a sin of crime, in the body, by to pay. If the people— conforming compadre mine Quelemem is who says— if the people turn to to incarnate renovated, I contemplate even that enemy of death can come as son of the enemy. Look see: if to myself I say, has a subject Pedro Pindo, neighbor of here more six leagues, man of good for all in all, he and the woman of his, always been good, of goodness. They have a son of some ten years called Valtei—name modern, is the that the population of here now appreciates, the Sir knows. Well this-little-thing, thislet, since that some understanding illuminated in him, deed demonstrated the that is: petition stepfather, acid burner, likeful of ruin of inside of the profundity of the species of its nature. In which that torments, to the slowly, of all beasts or raisinglings little that quarrel; one time he found a creole woman hooched foolish sleeping, he arranged a shard of bottle, lashed at three points on the stern of the legs of hers. The what this boy drooled seeing, is bleeding hen or to knife pig.— “I enjoy of to kill…”— one occasion he teeny me told. He opened in me a fright; because: birdy that self leans over— the flight yea is ready! Well the Sir oversee: the pa, Pedro Pindo, mode of to correct this, and the ma, they give in him, misery and mast—they cast the boy sans to eat, they tied to trees in the yard, he nude, unplumed, even in June cold, they tilled the bittybody of his with the trammel and with the goblet, after they cleansed the skin of the sanguine, with bottle gourd brine. The people know, spy, fix wasted. The boy yea relowered of thinness, the eyes entering, caress of bones, enskulled, and tuberculated, the time total hacking, coughness of the that draw parched pectorals. Arr, that now, visible, the Pindo and the woman self habituated of on him hit, of little bit in little they were creating in this a pleasure ugly of diversion— as they regulate the canings in hours certain comfortable, until they call people to see the example good. I think that boy not endure, yea there is in the ta-da, not arrive for the lent to come… Ooee-ooee, then?! Not being as compadre mine Quelemem to want, that explication is that the Sir bestowed? That boy had to be a man. He should, in swing, terrible perversities. Soul of his was in the pitch. Demonstrated. And, now, paid. Ah, but, happens, when he’s crying and paining, he suffers equal that as was as a boy good… Bird, I saw all, in this world! Yea I saw even horse with hiccups… —the that the thing most costous that is. Good, but the Sir may say, should of: and in the start— for offenses and arts, the people— as for that was that s’much amended was started? Ey, ey, ey all collided. Compadre mine Quelemem, too. Am solo a sertanite, in these high ideas I navigate mal. Am much poor poor-thing. Envy my pedigree and of ones conform the Sir, with total reading and doctoration. Not is that I be illiterate. I spelt, years and middle, midly speller, memory and palmer. I had master, Master Lucas, in the Curralinho, he memorized grammar, the operations, rule-of-three, even geography and study patria. On leaves great of paper, with caprice I traced handsome maps. Ah, not is for to speak: but, since of the start, me they thought sophisticated of side. And that I merited of to go to course latin, in Lesson Waterlily—that too they said. Time nostalgic! Going today, I appreciate a good book, despaced. On the farm The Lilittlelemon, of one mine friend Vito Soziano, so sign of this almanac thick, of logoglyphs and conundrums and other divided matters, all year come. In s’much, I place primacy is in the reading advantageous, life of saints, virtues and examples— missionary astute engambling the Indians, or Saint Francis of Assis, Saint Anthony, Saint Gerald… I like much of moral. To ratiocinate, exhort the others for the good way, to acounsel to just. Mine woman, that the Sir knows, vigils for me: much prayer. She is a blessable. Compadre mine Quelemem always says that I may to aquiet my fears on conscience, that being well-attended, terrible good-esprits me protect. Eep! With like… As is of saint effect, I help with mine to want to accredit. But not even always can I. The Sir knew: I total the mine life I thought for me, lining, I am born different. I am and I same. I divert of total the world… I almost that nothing not I know. But I disconfide of many things. The Sir, conceding, I say: in order to think long, I am dog master— the Sir loose in mine front an idea ease and I research that by profundity of total the backwoods, amen! Look: the should of to have, was of so reunited-selves the wise, politicos, constitutions graded, closed the definitive the notion— to proclaim for one time, art assemblies, that not have devil notone, not exists, not possible. Valor of law! Solo assuch, they gave tranquility good to the people. Because the government not cares?! Ah, I know that not is possible. Not me settled the Sir for philistine. One this is to place ideas arranged, other is to deal with country of people, of flesh and sanguine, of thousand-and-many miseries… S’many people—gives scare of to know—and notone so calms: All nascenting, crescendoing, so wedding, wanting collocation of employment, consumables, health, abundance, to be important, wanting rain and affairs good… Of luck that lacks of so to choose: or we t’weave of to live in the salacious common, or care solo of religion solo. I could to be: father clergyman, if not chief of jagunços; for other things not was I birthed. But mine oldness yea principaled I erred of total account. And the rheumatism… There as whom says: in the primers. Ahem. Hey? Hey? The that more I think, I testify and explain: all-the-world is mad. The Sir, I, we, the people all. For this is that so lacks principally of religion: in order to desendodorize, to disdodoate. Pray is that heals of lunacy. In the general. This is that is the salvation-of-the-soul…Much religion your servant! I here, not I lose occasion of religion. I profit of all. I drink water of all rivers… One solo, for me is little, maybe not me arrives. I pray christian, catholic, I burrow the certain; and I accept the prayers of compadre mine Quelemem, doctrine of he, of Kardec. But, when I can, I go in the Mindubim, where one Matias is believer, methodist: the people so accuse of sinner, reads high the bible, and why, singing hymns beautiful of his. Total me quiets, me suspends. Whatever small shade me refreshes. But is solo much provisory. I wanted to pray— the time total. Many people not me approve, they think that law of Deus is privileges, invariable. And I! Doof! I Detest! The what I am? — the what I do, that want, much curia. And in face of total I face, executed. I? —not I trammel. Look: I have a black girl, Maria Leoncia, long from here not she lives, the prayers of her afame much virtue of power. Well to her I pay, every month— ordering of to pray for me one third, every saint day, and, on the Sundays, a rosary. Value, so values. Mine woman not sees mal in this. And I am, yea mandated word for an other, of the voyage-voyage, a Izina Calanga, in order to come here, I heard of that prayer too with grand mermermerits, I go to effect with she treatment equal. I want handful of those, me defending in Deus, reunited of me in volta… Cuts of Christ! To live is much perilous… To want the good with too much force, of incertain way, can yea to be being so wanting the mal, per to initiate. These humans! All they pull the world for itself, for the to concert amended. But capita one solo sees and understands the things of one his world. Amountain, the most supro, most serious was Mediero Vaz. That one man ancient… his Joaozy Ben-Ben, the most brave of all, no-one never can decipher how he by inside consisted. Joca Ramiro— grand man prince!— was politico. Zé Bebelo wanted to be politico, but had and not had luck: fox that lingered. So Candelario so demonized, by to think that was with illness mal. Titao Passos was the by the appreciation of friends: solo per via of them, of his same amities, were that such high so ajagunçoed. Antonio Do— severe bandit. But by half, grand majority half that be. Andalecio, in the profound, a good man-of-good, being raving in his total justice. Ricardao, same, wanted was to be rich in peace: for this he warred. Solo the Hermogenes was that born formed tiger, and assassinite. And the “Ofidios White”? Ah, not me speak. Ah this… joyless mischeivious, that was— that was a poor boy of the destiny… So good, congruous. The Sir heard, I you told: the ruin with the ruin, they terminate by the spine-bushes so to crack— Deus awaits that spendance. Boy!: Deus is patience. The contrary, is the devil. So consumes. The Sir file knife on knife— and file— that so they scrape. Even the rocks of the profound, one of in the other, they go-so aroundabounding even, that the rivulet rolls. Per enquantity, that I think, total as hath, in this world, is because so merits and lacks. Afterly precise. Deus not so reports with rifle, not garrotes the regulation. For what? Quit: goof with goof—one day, some illumination and learn: smart. Solo that, at times, for most auxiliar, Deus begets, in the middle, a pinch of pepper… Therebe? Well, for example: some time, I went of train, there in Seven-Lagoons, for parts of to consult a medical, of name me indicated. He went vested well, and in car of first, by via of the doubts, not me they shadowed for jagunço ancient. It goes and happens, that, close same of me, enfront, he took aseat, returning from the wild North, a mac Jazevedao, delegate professionale. Came with a capanga of his, an undercover, and I well knew the two, of that s’much a was ruin, as the other ruin was. The veracity to say, first I had the strict of me to surpasss for one lonng, to mutate of my place. Judgement me told, meliorate stay. Well, looking, I looked. And— you I tell: never I saw face of man furnished of brutez or malady more, of the them in that. As that was ogre, trussed of thickset, relustered of crude in the eyes small, and armed a chin of stone, toweringbrow; not of mid nor forehead. Not laughed, not so laughed not even one time; but, speaking or silent, the people appeared always to him some teeth, prey pointed of canids. Arr, and blustered, an ittybit. Solo growled curt, low, the mid-words grizzled. He came relooking, historicizing the documents— one by one the leaves with portraits and with the blacks of the digits of jagunços, lifters of horses and criminouses of death. That application of work, in one thing of those, generated the ire in the people. The undercover, busybodyguard, total close, seated joined, attending, excelling of to be dog. Me made a dread, but solo in the goof of the corpus, not in the intern of the courages. One hour, one of those reports fell— and I bent quickly, I knew there precisely by why, not I wanted, not I thought— even today I raise shame of this— I picked the paper of the ground, and delivered to him. Thereof, I say: I had more rage, because I did that; but there yea it was done. The man not even me looked, not even said notone thankfulment. Event he soles of the shoes of his— solo looking— that soles rough thick, bent of enormous, appearing iron bronzed. Because I knew: This Jazevedao, when he apprehended someone, the primary quiet thing that proceeded was that he came entering, sans to have to to say, feigning some hurry, and go stepping on the top of the feet of the poorthings. And that on these occasions he gave laughters, gave… Well, geck! I delivered to him the leaf of paper, and went leaving of there, by to have hand on me of not to destroy by shots that subject. Meat that much they weigh… And umbilicated beginning of belly pot bellied, that me created will… With my lightness, joyful that I’d kill. But, the barbarities that this delegate made and happened, the Sir not even has callus in heart to be able me to hear. He achieved of many men and women to cry blood, for the simple universolo ours here. Sertão. The Sir knows: sertão is where mandates who is strong, with the guile. And bullet is a tidbit of metal… S’much, I say: Jazevedao— one assuch, should of to have, needed? Ah, need. Leather ruined is that calls goad of point. That there be that, after— business particular of he— in the life or in the other, each Jazevedao, accomplished the that he has, desclimbs in his time of pain, too, until to pay the that he gave— compadre mine Quelemem is there, in order to fiscalize. The Sir knows: the peril that is to live… But solo of the mode, of these, by ugly instrument, was that the jagunsaga so finished. Sir thinks that Antonio Do or Olivino Oliviano were going to fix goodies by pure spelling of itself, or by begging of the infelicitous, or by always to hear sermon of father? You I think! In the aims… Of jagunço comported active in order so to repent in the middle of his jagunsagas, solo I lay of one: called Joe Cazuzo— was in smashing of one shotshow, for on the summit of the place Sierra New, district of river rusted, on the stream Traçadal. We made mal minority small, and they closed in order summit of us the personnel of one Coronel Adalvino, forted politico, with many soldiers uniformed in the center, commanding of the Lieutenant Epiphany Helm, that after fixed captain. We lasted hour more hour, and yea gave almost of encircled. There, of misslip, that Joe Cazuzo— man much valiant— so kneeled turned on the ground of the thick, lifted the arms that not even shoots of Jatoba dry, and solo yell, howl clear and howl deaf:— “I saw the Virgin Ours, in the resplendor of the Heavens, with her children of angels!... ” He screamed not touched. — “I saw the Virgin!... ” He ensouled? We desequaled. Bolt for my horse—that I thought— I leaped in mal seat, noteven I knew in which rupture-time I unfastened the halter, of tied up it foot of timber. I flew, arrived. Bullet come. The pasture roared. In the brush, the fear of the people so goes to the whole, one fear intentional. I could to lash out, fated burro brute, giv-that, giv-that. Some two or three bullets so drovein the pad of the mine saddle, they perforated of to tear away almost much the kapok of the filling. Horse trembled in pro, in middle of gallop, I know: thinks in the owner. I not fit of to be more well shrunken. Bulleted came to the sack that I had on the back, with few mine things. And other, of fusil, in ricochet decreed, heated my thigh, sans me wound, the Sir see: bullet does the what to want—so pierced impressed, between in me and the harness! Times crazy… Burumbum!: the horse so kneeled in the fall, dead perhaps, and I yea falling for front, embraced in foliage full, branched and linias, that me swayed and skewered, done I was pendulating in web of spider… Whither? I traversed that life total… Of fear of anxiety, I ruptured to read with mine corpus that forest, I know there — and me fell world below, rolled for the hollow of a grotto closed of shrubs, always me grasped— rolled same assuch: after: after, when I saw mine hands, total on they that not was withdrawn sanguine, was smeared green, on the digits, of leaves living that I pulled and mashed… I landed on the sedge of the profound— and a beast dark gave a releap, with a sneeze, too mad of fright: that was a papa-mel, that I descried; in order to flee, this is solely. Bigger being I, me doused mine overcoat; I spigotted total. And of one bit of thought: if that beast irara lying there then there not had cobra. I took the place of his. Existed cobra notone. I could me to lose. I was solo spineless, softness, but that not deadened, inside, the collisions of the heart. I gasped. I conceived that they came, me kill. Not even did mal, me mattered not. Assuch, some moments, at least I guarded the license of term in order me to rest. Conforming I thought in Diadorim. Solo I thought was in he. One joão-congo sang. I wanted to die thinking in my friend Diadorim, hand-o-bro, who was on the Sierra of WoodO’Bow, almost on the border baiana, with our other half of the so-candelarios… With my friend Diadorim me embraced, sentiment my went-flew right for he… Ay, arr, but: that this mine mouth not has order notone. I am accounting outside, things divagated. In the Sir me confide? Til-that, til-that. Say the angel-of-the-guard… But, conforming I came: after so knew, that same the soldiers of the Lieutenant and the goats of Coronel Adalvino remitted of to respect the blast of that Joe Cazuzo. And that this ended being the man most pacificious of the world, fabricator of oil and sacristan, in the Saint Sundays White. Times! For total, cleaned revelation, I fix thinking. I like. Meliorate, for the idea if well to open, is travelling in train-of-iron. Could, lived to top and to bottom, inside of it. Information that I ask: same in the Heavens, end of end, how is that the soul wins so to forget s’much sufferments and maladies, in the received and in the given? The how? The Sir knows: are things of hideous ofmuch, have. Pain of corpus and pain of idea mark forted, that forted as the total love and rage of hate. Goes, sea… Of luck that, then, the Firmiano, by appellationed Louse-of-Snake, so leoprosized with the leg disconformed, thickening, of that disease that not so cures; and not discern almost more, constant the branchials in the eyes, of the cataracts. Of before, years, had to of so disarray of the jagunsaga. Well, one occasion, some was on the ranch of his, on the High Jeuitai, after accounted—that, turns time, comes subject, he would say: “Me give yearning is of to seize a soldier, and such, for one good flay, with knife blind… But, first, to castrate…” The Sir conceive? Who has more dose of demon in self is Indian, any race of brusque. Folk see nation ofthese, for there profound of the generals of Goias, theofwhere has vagarous grand rivers, of aquas always so clear pleasantly, running of down crystal rosed… Louse-of-Snake gave of sanguine of heathen. Sir me will say: but that he pronounced that out of mouth, manner of to represent that yet not was old decadent. Opus of to oppose, for fear of to be tame, and cause in order so to see respected. Total listened for such rule: palavered of ruins, for more so valued, because we to the environs is hard durability. The worst, but, is that they finish, through the same ford, given of one day to execute the declared, in the real. I saw s’much crudity! Pain not pays to account; if I go, I collide. And me dedrip, three that me sicken, this total. Me convokes that the personnel, today in day, is good of heart. This is, good in the trivial. Malices wildwants, and perversities, always have some, but scarcities. Generation mine, true, was not assuch. Ah, goes to turn a time, in which not is used more to kill people… I yea am old. Good, I was saying: question, this that me excavates… Ah, I formed that question, for compadre mine Quelemem. That me responded: that, for close to heaven, we so amplified so, that total the uglies past so exhaled of not to be—fated sans-modus from time of youngster, mal-arts. As we not lack of to have remorse of the which divulged in the pulsation of his nightmares of one night. Assuch that: fleeced-so, flourished-so! Ahem. For this said, is that the journey to the Heavens is delayed. I confide with compadre mine Quelemem, the Sir knows: reason of creed same that has—that, for total the mal, that so does, one day so repays, the exact. Subject assuch rises three times, in ante of to want to facilitate in any minutia reprehensible… Compadre mine Quelemem never speaks vacant, not subtreats. Solo that this to he not I go to expose. We never should have to declare that accept entire the alien—that is what is the rule of the king! The Sir look…see: the most important and beautiful, of the world, is this: that the people are not always same, still were not completed — but that they go always shifting. They tune or detune. Truth major. Is the that the life me taught. This that me animates, mound. And, other thing: the devil and the brutes; but Deus is treacherous! Ah, a beauty of treacherous— gives like! The force of his, when he wants— boy!— me gives the fear dread! Deus comes coming: no one not sees. He does in the law of gentle— assuch is the miracle. And Deus attacks beautiful, so amusing, so economizes. The well: one day in a tannery, the little knife mine I had dropped inside of a tank, solo soup of bark of tan, stryphnodendron adstringens, angico, there I know. —“Tomorrow I try…”— I said, withmyself. Because it was of night, light notone I not disputed. Ah, then, I found: on the other day, early, the knife, the iron of it, had been gnawed, almost by half, by that aqua dark, total quiet. I left, for more to see. Crack, fuse! Know the what was? Well, in that same of afternoon, there: of the little knife solo so found the handle… The handle, for not to be of cold metal, but of horn of deer. There is: Deus… Good, the Sir heard knows, the that knows me understands… We sum, not think that religion fractures. Sir think the contrary. Visible that, those other times, I painted—belief that the neoglaziovia variegata lifts the flower. Ah, good my joy… Boyhood. But boyhood is task for more later so to deny. Too, I of that of to think in vague in s’much, lost mine hand-of-man for the management hot, in the middle of all. But, today, that I ratiocinated, and think the endeavor, not nor for this not I give for low my competence, in a fire-and-iron. The to see. Would approach would come here with war on me, with bad parts, with other laws, or with excessive looks, and I even draw to ignite this zone, ay, if, if! Is in the mouth of the blunderbuss: is in the rete-te-tem… And lonelyonly not I am, there-of-the. For not this, I was I placed encircle my mine people. Look the Sir: here, close, vereda below, the Paspe — cropper my — is mine. More league, if that, have the Herpetotheres, and have the compadre Ciril, him and three children, I know that they serve. Band of that hand, the Alaripe: knew the Sir the that is that so boasts, in rifleation and by the knife, one cearense did this! After more: the João Innatal, the Quipes, Lophiosilurus-of-claws. And the Fafafa— this gave fights high, all side with me, in the combat old of the Anteater-such: we cleaned the wind of whom not had order of to respirate, and ante these we desencompassed… The Fafafa has a mass of mares. He raises horses good. Even a little more distant, on the ped-of-sierra, of band mine was the Sesfred, Jesualdo, the Nelson, and João Concliz. Some others. The Triol… And not I go valuing? I leave terra with them, of theirs the what is mine is, we close that we not even brothers. For what I want to gather richness? They are there, of arms aireated. Enemy to come, we cross called, gathering: is hour of one good shotshowerment in peace, they exp’riment to see. I say this to the Sir, of confidence. Too, not go to think in double. We want is to work, propose tranquility. Of me, person, I live for mine woman, that total mode-meliorate merits, and for the devotion. Well-to want of mine woman was that me assisted, prayers of hers, graces. Love comes of love. I say. In Diadorim, I think too— but Diadorim is the mine nebulina… Now, well: not I wanted to touch on this more— of the Tineaous; arrive. But has a nevertheless: I ask: the Sir believe, think trust of truth in that parlance, of with the demon so to able to deal with pact? No, no is no? I knew that not there. I spoke of favas. But I like of total good confirmation. To vend you proper soul… Inventionate false! And, soul, the what is? Soul of has to be thing internal supremed, much more of the of inside, and is solo, of the that one if thought: ah, soul sheer! Decision of to vend soul is fearless moll, fantasied of moment, has not the obedience legal. Can I to vend those good terras, thereof of between the Veredas-Four— that are of one Mr. Admiral, who resides in the capital federal? Can I some? Then, if one boy boy is, and for this not so authorizes of to negotiate… And we, this I know, at times is solo fated boy. Mal that in mine life I prepared, I was in a certain infancy in dreams — total runs and arrives so swift —; will be that if hath flame of responsibilities? If dream; yea so did… I gave rapadura to the chump! Ahem. Well. If his soul, and has, it is of Deus established, not even that the person want or not want. Not is vendible. The Sir not thinks? Me declare, frank, I beg. Ah, you I appreciate. You so see that the Sir knows much, in idea firm, beyond of to have letter of doctor. You I appreciate, for much. Your company me gives high pleasures. In terms, I liked that I would live here, or close, was a help. Here not so has conviviation that to instruct. Sertão. Knows the Sir: sertão is where the thought of the people so forms more forted of the than power of the place. To live is much perilous… Eh, that you so go? Yeayea? Is that not. Today, no. Tomorrow, no. Not I consense. The Sir me forgive, but in endeavor of mine friendship accept: the Sir stay. After fifth of-morning-early, the Sir wanting to go, then goes, same me leaves feeling your absence. But, today or tomorrow, no. Visit, here in house, with me, is for three days! But, the Sir really intends to trespass the field this sea of territotires, for sortment of to confer the what exists? You have your motives. Now— I say for me — the Sir comes, came late, Times were, the customs mutate. Almost that, of legitimate loyal, little surplus, not even no excess more nothing. The bands good of valientoughs they reparted their end; many who were jagunço, by ouch pain, beg alms. Same as the herdsmen they doubt of to come in the commerce vested of clothes entire of leather, they think that garb of jerkin is ugly and boor. And even the herd in the shrubbed pasture goes waning less mad, more educated: casted of zebu, dissee with the rest of corralers and captiveborns. Always, in the generals is to the poverty, to the sadness. A sadness that even gladdens. But, then, for a crop reasonable of bizzarancies, I recounsel of the Sir to entest journey more dilated. Not were my desmight, by acids and rheumatism, there I went. I guided the Sir till total. March 2013 San Diego, CA ORIGINAL TEXT NONADA. TIROS QUE O SENHOR ouviu foram de briga de homem não, Deus esteja. Alvejei mira em árvores no quintal, no baixo do córrego. Por meu acerto. Todo dia isso faço, gosto; desde mal em minha mocidade. Daí, vieram me chamar. Causa dumbezerro: um bezerro branco, erroso, os olhos de nem ser – se viu –; e com máscara de cachorro. Me disseram; eu não quis avistar. Mesmo que, por defeito como nasceu, arrebitado de beiços, esse figurava rindo feito pessoa. Cara de gente, cara de cão: determinaram – era o demo. Povo prascóvio. Mataram. Dono dele nem sei quem for. Vieram emprestar minhas armas, cedi. Não tenho abusões. O senhor ri certas risadas... Olhe: quando é tiro de verdade, primeiro a cachorrada pega a latir, instantaneamente – depois, então, se vai ver se deu mortos. O senhor tolere, isto é o sertão. Uns querem que não seja: que situado sertão é por os campos-gerais a fora a dentro, eles dizem, fim de rumo, terras altas, demais do Urucuia. Toleima. Para os de Corinto e do Curvelo, então, o aqui não é dito sertão? Ah, que tem maior! Lugar sertão se divulga: é onde os pastos carecem de fechos; onde um pode torar dez, quinze léguas, sem topar com casa de morador; e onde criminoso vive seu cristo-jesus, arredado do arrocho de autoridade. O Urucuia vem dos montões oestes. Mas, hoje, que na beira dele, tudo dá – fazendões de fazendas, almargem de vargens de bom render, as vazantes; culturas que vão de mata em mata, madeiras de grossura, até ainda virgens dessas lá há. O gerais corre em volta. Esses gerais são sem tamanho. Enfim, cada um o que quer aprova, o senhor sabe: pão ou pães, é questão de opiniães... O sertão está em toda a parte. Do demo? Não gloso. Senhor pergunte aos moradores. Em falso receio, desfalam no nome dele – dizem só: o Que-Diga. Vote! não... Quem muito se evita, se convive. Sentença num Aristides – o que existe no buritizal primeiro desta minha mão direita, chamado a Vereda-da-Vaca-Mansa-deSanta-Rita – todo o mundo crê: ele não pode passar em três lugares, designados: porque então a gente escuta um chorinho, atrás, e uma vozinha que avisando: – “Eu já vou! Eu já vou!...” – que é o capiroto, o que-diga... E um José Simpilício – quem qualquer daqui jura ele tem um capeta em casa, miúdo satanazim, preso obrigado a ajudar em toda ganância que executa; razão que o Simpilício se empresa em vias de completar de rico. Apre, por isso dizem também que a besta pra ele rupeia, nega de banda, não deixando, quando ele quer amontar... Superstição. José Simpilício e Aristides, mesmo estão se engordando, de assim nãoouvir ou ouvir. Ainda o senhor estude: agora mesmo, nestes dias de época, tem gente porfalando que o Diabo próprio parou, de passagem, no Andrequicé. Um Moço de fora, teria aparecido, e lá se louvou que, para aqui vir – normal, a cavalo, dum dia-e-meio – ele era capaz que só com uns vinte minutos bastava... porque costeava o Rio do Chico pelas cabeceiras! Ou, também, quem sabe – sem ofensas – não terá sido, por um exemplo, até mesmo o senhor quem se anunciou assim, quando passou por lá, por prazido divertimento engraçado? Há-de, não me dê crime, sei que não foi. E mal eu não quis. Só que uma pergunta, em hora, às vezes, clareia razão de paz. Mas, o senhor entenda: o tal moço, se há, quis mangar. Pois, hem, que, despontar o Rio pelas nascentes, será a mesma coisa que um se redobrar nos internos deste nosso Estado nosso, custante viagem de uns três meses... Então? Que-Diga? Doideira. A fantasiação. E, o respeito de dar a ele assim esses nomes de rebuço, é que é mesmo um querer invocar que ele forme forma, com as presenças! Não seja. Eu, pessoalmente, quase que já perdi nele a crença, mercês a Deus; é o que ao senhor lhe digo, à puridade. Sei que é bem estabelecido, que grassa nos Santos- Evangelhos. Em ocasião, conversei com um rapaz seminarista, muito condizente, conferindo no livro de rezas e revestido de paramenta, com uma vara de maria-preta na mão – proseou que ia adjutorar o padre, para extraírem o Cujo, do corpo vivo de uma velha, na Cachoeira-dos-Bois, ele ia com o vigário do Campo-Redondo... Me concebo. O senhor não é como eu? Não acreditei patavim. Compadre meu Quelemém descreve que o que revela efeito são os baixos espíritos descarnados, de terceira, fuzuando nas piores trevas e com ânsias de se travarem com os viventes – dão encosto. Compadre meu Quelemém é quem muito me consola – Quelemém de Góis. Mas ele tem de morar longe daqui, na Jijujã, Vereda do Buriti Pardo... Arres, me deixe lá, que – em endemoninhamento ou com encosto – o senhor mesmo deverá de ter conhecido diversos, homens, mulheres. Pois não sim? Por mim, tantos vi, que aprendi. Rincha- Mãe, Sangued’Outro, o Muitos-Beiços, o Rasgaem-Baixo, Faca-Fria, o Fancho-Bode, um Treciziano, o Azinhavre... o Hermógenes... Deles, punhadão. Se eu pudesse esquecer tantos nomes... Não sou amansador de cavalos! E, mesmo, quem de si de ser jagunço se entrete, já é por alguma competência entrante do demônio. Será não? Será? De primeiro, eu fazia e mexia, e pensar não pensava. Não possuía os prazos. Vivi puxando difícil de dificel, peixe vivo no moquém: quem mói no asp’ro, não fantaseia. Mas, agora, feita a folga que me vem, e sem pequenos dessossegos, estou de range rede. E me inventei neste gosto, de especular idéia. O diabo existe e não existe? Dou o dito. Abrenúncio. Essas melancolias. O senhor vê: existe cachoeira; e pois? Mas cachoeira é barranco de chão, e água se caindo por ele, retombando; o senhor consome essa água, ou desfaz o barranco, sobra cachoeira alguma? Viver é negócio muito perigoso... Explico ao senhor: o diabo vige dentro do homem, os crespos do homem – ou é o homem arruinado, ou o homem dos avessos. Solto, por si, cidadão, é que não tem diabo nenhum. Nenhum! – é o que digo. O senhor aprova? Me declare tudo, franco – é alta mercê que me faz: e pedir posso, encarecido. Este caso – por estúrdio que me vejam – é de minha certa importância. Tomara não fosse... Mas, não diga que o senhor, assisado e instruído, que acredita na pessoa dele?! Não? Lhe agradeço! Sua alta opinião compõe minha valia. Já sabia, esperava por ela-já o campo! Ah, a gente, na velhice, carece de ter sua aragem de descanso. Lhe agradeço. Tem diabo nenhum. Nem espírito. Nunca vi. Alguém devia de ver, então era eu mesmo, este vosso servidor. Fosse lhe contar... Bem, o diabo regula seu estado preto, nas criaturas, nas mulheres, nos homens. Até: nas crianças – eu digo. Pois não é ditado: “menino – trem do diabo”? E nos usos, nas plantas, nas águas, na terra, no vento... Estrumes. ... O diabo na rua, no meio do redemunho... Hem? Hem? Ah. Figuração minha, de pior pra trás, as certas lembranças. Mal hajame! Sofro pena de contar não... Melhor, se arrepare: pois, num chão, e com igual formato de ramos e folhas, não dá a mandioca mansa, que se come comum, e a mandioca-brava, que mata? Agora, o senhor já viu uma estranhez? A mandioca-doce pode de repente virar azangada – motivos não sei; às vezes se diz que é por replantada no terreno sempre, com mudas seguidas, de manaíbas – vai em amargando, de tanto em tanto, de si mesma toma peçonhas. E, ora veja: a outra, a mandiocabrava, também é que às vezes pode ficar mansa, a esmo, de se comer sem nenhum mal. E que isso é? Eh, o senhor já viu, por ver, a feiúra de ódio franzido, carantonho, nas faces duma cobra cascavel? Observou o porco gordo, cada dia mais feliz bruto, capaz de, pudesse, roncar e engolir por sua suja comodidade o mundo todo? E gavião, corvo, alguns, as feições deles já representam a precisão de talhar para adiante, rasgar e estraçalhar a bico, parece uma quicé muito afiada por ruim desejo. Tudo. Tem até tortas raças de pedras, horrorosas, venenosas – que estragam mortal a água, se estão jazendo em fundo de poço; o diabo dentro delas dorme: são o demo. Se sabe? E o demo – que é só assim o significado dum azougue maligno – tem ordem de seguir o caminho dele, tem licença para campear?! Arre, ele está misturado em tudo. Que o que gasta, vai gastando o diabo de dentro da gente, aos pouquinhos, é o razoável sofrer. E a alegria de amor – compadre meu Quelemém, diz. Família. Deveras? É, e não é. O senhor ache e não ache. Tudo é e não é... Quase todo mais grave criminoso feroz, sempre é muito bom marido, bom filho, bom pai, e é bom amigo-de-seus-amigos! Sei desses. Só que tem os depois – e Deus, junto. Vi muitas nuvens. Mas, em verdade, filho, também, abranda. Olhe: um chamado Aleixo, residente a légua do Passo do Pubo, no da-Areia, era o homem de maiores ruindades calmas que já se viu. Me agradou que perto da casa dele tinha um açudinho, entre as palmeiras, com traíras, pra-almas de enormes, desenormes, ao real, que receberam fama; o Aleixo dava de comer a elas, em horas justas, elas se acostumaram a se assim das locas, para papar, semelhavam ser peixes ensinados. Um dia, só por graça rústica, ele matou um velhinho que por lá passou, desvalido rogando esmola. O senhor não duvide – tem gente, neste aborrecido mundo, que matam só para ver alguém fazer careta... Eh, pois, empós, o resto o senhor prove: vem o pão, vem a mão, vem o são, vem o cão. Esse Aleixo era homem afamilhado, tinha filhos pequenos; aqueles eram o amor dele, todo, despropósito. Dê bem, que não nem um ano estava passado, de se matar o velhinho pobre, e os meninos do Aleixo aí adoeceram. Andaço de sarampão, se disse, mas complicado; eles nunca saravam. Quando, então, sararam. Mas os olhos deles vermelhavam altos, numa inflama de sapiranga à rebelde; e susseguinte – o que não sei é se foram todos duma vez, ou um logo e logo outro e outro – eles restaram cegos. Cegos, sem remissão dum favinho de luz dessa nossa! O senhor imagine: uma escadinha – três meninos e uma menina – todos cegados. Sem remediável. O Aleixo não perdeu o juizo; mas mudou: ah, demudou completo – agora vive da banda de Deus, suando para ser bom e caridoso em todas suas horas da noite e do dia. Parece até que ficou o feliz, que antes não era. Ele mesmo diz que foi um homem de sorte, porque Deus quis ter pena dele, transformar para lá o rumo de sua alma. Isso eu ouvi, e me deu raiva. Razão das crianças. Se sendo castigo, que culpa das hajas do Aleixo aqueles meninozinhos tinham?! Compadre meu Quelemém reprovou minhas incertezas. Que, por certo, noutra vida revirada, os meninos também tinham sido os mais malvados, da massa e peça do pai, demônios do mesmo caldeirão de lugar. Senhor o que acha? E o velhinho assassinado? – eu sei que o senhor vai discutir. Pois, também. Em ordem que ele tinha um pecado de crime, no corpo, por pagar. Se a gente – conforme compadre meu Quelemém é quem diz – se a gente torna a encarnar renovado, eu cismo até que inimigo de morte pode vir como filho do inimigo. Mire veja: se me digo, tem um sujeito Pedro Pindó, vizinho daqui mais seis léguas, homem de bem por tudo em tudo, ele e a mulher dele, sempre sidos bons, de bem. Eles têm um filho duns dez anos, chamado Valtei – nome moderno, é o que o povo daqui agora apreceia, o senhor sabe. Pois essezinho, essezim, desde que algum entendimento alumiou nele, feito mostrou o que é: pedido madrasto, azedo queimador, gostoso de ruim de dentro do fundo das espécies de sua natureza. Em qual que judia, ao devagar, de todo bicho ou criaçãozinha pequena que pega; uma vez, encontrou uma crioula bentabêbada dormindo, arranjou um caco de garrafa, lanhou em três pontos a popa da perna dela. O que esse menino babeja vendo, é sangrarem galinha ou esfaquear porco. – “Eu gosto de matar...” – uma ocasião ele pequenino me disse. Abriu em mim um susto; porque: passarinho que se debruça – o vôo já está pronto! Pois, o senhor vigie: o pai, Pedro Pindó, modo de corrigir isso, e a mãe, dão nele, de miséria e mastro – botam o menino sem comer, amarram em árvores no terreiro, ele nu nuelo, mesmo em junho frio, lavram o corpinho dele na peia e na taca, depois limpam a pele do sangue, com cuia de salmoura. A gente sabe, espia, fica gasturado. O menino já rebaixou de magreza, os olhos entrando, carinha de ossos, encaveirada, e entisicou, o tempo todo tosse, tossura da que puxa secos peitos. Arre, que agora, visível, o Pindó e a mulher se habituaram de nele bater, de pouquinho em pouquim foram criando nisso um prazer feio de diversão – como regulam as sovas em horas certas confortáveis, até chamam gente para ver o exemplo bom. Acho que esse menino não dura, já está no blimbilim, não chega para a quaresma que vem... Uê-uê, então?!Não sendo como compadre meu Quelemém quer, que explicação é que o senhor dava? Aquele menino tinha sido homem. Devia, em balanço, terríveis perversidades. Alma dele estava no breu. Mostrava. E, agora, pagava. Ah, mas, acontece, quando está chorando e penando, ele sofre igual que se fosse um menino bonzinho... Ave, vi de tudo, neste mundo! lá vi até cavalo com soluço... – o que é a coisa mais custosa que há. Bem, mas o senhor dirá, deve de: e no começo – para pecados e artes, as pessoas – como por que foi que tanto emendado se começou? Ei, ei, aí todos esbarram. Compadre meu Quelemém, também. Sou só um sertanejo, nessas altas idéias navego mal. Sou muito pobre coitado. Inveja minha pura é de uns conforme o senhor, com toda leitura e suma doutoração. Não é que eu esteja analfabeto. Soletrei, anos e meio, meante cartilha, memória e palmatória. Tive mestre, Mestre Lucas, no Curralinho, decorei gramática, as operações, regra-de-três, até geografia e estudo pátrio. Em folhas grandes de papel, com capricho tracei bonitos mapas. Ah, não é por falar: mas, desde o começo, me achavam sofismado de ladino. E que eu merecia de ir para cursar latim, em Aula Régia – que também diziam. Tempo saudoso! Inda hoje, apreceio um bom livro, despaçado. Na fazenda O Limãozinho, de um meu amigo Vito Soziano, se assina desse almanaque grosso, de logogrifos e charadas e outras divididas matérias, todo ano vem. Em tanto, ponho primazia é na leitura proveitosa, vida de santo, virtudes e exemplos – missionário esperto engambelando os índios, ou São Francisco de Assis, Santo Antônio, São Geraldo... Eu gosto muito de moral. Raciocinar, exortar os outros para o bom caminho, aconselhar a justo. Minha mulher, que o senhor sabe, zela por mim: muito reza. Ela é uma abençoável. Compadre meu Quelemém sempre diz que eu posso aquietar meu temer de consciência, que sendo bem-assistido, terríveis bons-espíritos me protegem. Ipe! Com gosto... Como é de são efeito, ajudo com meu querer acreditar. Mas nem sempre posso. O senhor saiba: eu toda a minha vida pensei por mim, forro, sou nascido diferente. Eu sou é eu mesmo. Diverjo de todo o mundo... Eu quase que nada não sei. Mas desconfio de muita coisa. O senhor concedendo, eu digo: para pensar longe, sou cão mestre – o senhor solte em minha frente uma idéia ligeira, e eu rastreio essa por fundo de todos os matos, amém! Olhe: o que devia de haver, era de se reunirem-se os sábios, políticos, constituições gradas, fecharem o definitivo a noção – proclamar por uma vez, artes assembléias, que não tem diabo nenhum, não existe, não pode. Valor de lei! Só assim, davam tranqüilidade boa à gente. Por que o Governo não cuida?! Ah, eu sei que não é possível. Não me assente o senhor por beócio. Uma coisa é pôr idéias arranjadas, outra é lidar com país de pessoas, de carne e sangue, de mil-e-tantas misérias... Tanta gente – dá susto de saber – e nenhum se sossega: todos nascendo, crescendo, se casando, querendo colocação de emprego, comida, saúde, riqueza, ser importante, querendo chuva e negócios bons... De sorte que carece de se escolher: ou a gente se tece de viver no safado comum, ou cuida só de religião só. Eu podia ser: padre sacerdote, se não chefe de jagunços; para outras coisas não fui parido. Mas minha velhice já principiou, errei de toda conta. E o reumatismo... Lá como quem diz: nas escorvas. Ahã. Hem? Hem? O que mais penso, testo e explico: todo-omundo é louco. O senhor, eu, nós, as pessoas todas. Por isso é que se carece principalmente de religião: para se desendoidecer, desdoidar. Reza é que sara da loucura. No geral. Isso é que é a salvaçãoda- alma... Muita religião, seu moço! Eu cá, não perco ocasião de religião. Aproveito de todas. Bebo água de todo rio... Uma só, para mim é pouca, talvez não me chegue. Rezo cristão, católico, embrenho a certo; e aceito as preces de compadre meu Quelemém, doutrina dele, de Cardéque. Mas, quando posso, vou no Mindubim, onde um Matias é crente, metodista: a gente se acusa de pecador, lê alto a Bíblia, e ora, cantando hinos belos deles. Tudo me quieta, me suspende. Qualquer sombrinha me refresca. Mas é só muito provisório. Eu queria rezar – o tempo todo. Muita gente não me aprova, acham que lei de Deus é privilégios, invariável. E eu! Bofe! Detesto! O que sou? – o que faço, que quero, muito curial. E em cara de todos faço, executado. Eu não tresmalho! Olhe: tem uma preta, Maria Leôncia, longe daqui não mora, as rezas dela afamam muita virtude de poder. Pois a ela pago, todo mês – encomenda de rezar por mim um terço, todo santo dia, e, nos domingos, um rosário. Vale, se vale. Minha mulher não vê mal nisso. E estou, já mandei recado para uma outra, do Vau-Vau, uma Izina Calanga, para vir aqui, ouvi de que reza também com grandes meremerências, vou efetuar com ela trato igual. Quero punhado dessas, me defendendo em Deus, reunidas de mim em volta... Chagas de Cristo! Viver é muito perigoso... Querer o bem com demais força, de incerto jeito, pode já estar sendo se querendo o mal, por principiar. Esses homens! Todos puxavam o mundo para si, para o concertar consertado. Mas cada um só vê e entende as coisas dum seu modo. Montante, o mais supro, mais sério – foi Medeiro Vaz. Que um homem antigo... Seu Joãozinho Bem-Bem, o mais bravo de todos, ninguém nunca pôde decifrar como ele por dentro consistia. Joca Ramiro – grande homem príncipe! – era político. Zé- Bebelo quis ser político. (shrink)

Jean Paul Sarte, Franz Kafka i Milan Kundera: tres mirades diferents sobre la realitat, tres percepcions del món que participen d'un mateix rerafons filosòfic, d'una mateixa sensibilitat: l'absurd. Tres obres que neixen, creixen i maduren sota l'eclipsi de Déu, en l'atmosfera de la buidor més penetrant i la negació radical del sentit. L'ésser és estantís, feble, pura representació, i la vida humana una comèdia tragicòmica que comença per casualitat i s'acaba també per pura casualitat. Però l'home ha de viure, (...) i si el món no té sentit, caldrà forjar-lo amb les pròpies mans, caldrà projectar una idea per la qual valgui la pena viure i morir (Kierkegaard). Tres iniciatives, tres expectatives, que es configuren sota l'escola de l'absurd i la mort de Déu (Nietzsche). Davant d'aquesta concepció del món marcada pel desencís i l'angoixa hi ha la metafísica de la plenitud de l'ésser (sant Tomàs d'Aquino), que descriu l'univers com un dinamisme perfectiu que té una direccionalitat pròpia, una causa primera i un fi darrer. La lògica del sentit versus la lògica de la buidor. (shrink)

Jean Paul Sarte, Franz Kafka i Milan Kundera: tres mirades diferents sobre la realitat, tres percepcions del món que participen d'un mateix rerafons filosòfic, d'una mateixa sensibilitat: l'absurd. Tres obres que neixen, creixen i maduren sota l'eclipsi de Déu, en l'atmosfera de la buidor més penetrant i la negació radical del sentit. L'ésser és estantís, feble, pura representació, i la vida humana una comèdia tragicòmica que comença per casualitat i s'acaba també per pura casualitat. Però l'home ha de viure, (...) i si el món no té sentit, caldrà forjar-lo amb les pròpies mans, caldrà projectar una idea per la qual valgui la pena viure i morir (Kierkegaard). Tres iniciatives, tres expectatives, que es configuren sota l'escola de l'absurd i la mort de Déu (Nietzsche). Davant d'aquesta concepció del món marcada pel desencís i l'angoixa hi ha la metafísica de la plenitud de l'ésser (sant Tomàs d'Aquino), que descriu l'univers com un dinamisme perfectiu que té una direccionalitat pròpia, una causa primera i un fi darrer. La lògica del sentit versus la lògica de la buidor. (shrink)

L’estiu de 1947, tres joves amics, Yves Klein, Claude Pascal i Armand Fernandez, s’asseuen a la platja de Niça. Encara no són artistes, no fan res i perden el temps omplint-lo de projectes i paraules. Prenen el sol, miren el mar i el cel de la Mediterrània, fan declaracions entusiastes sobre el Gran Art del futur i comparteixen la natura, com uns nens que es divideixen un regne imaginari. Klein pren el blau del cel que abasta amb la mirada, com (...) el color absolut i ideal de la pintura. -/- Yves le Monochrome dirà diverses vegades que, aquell matí d’estiu, va fer un viatge fantàstic, com si fos un astronauta conquerint l’espai, i va signar, com si es tractés d’un llenç pintat de blau, l’altre costat d’aquest bell cel sense núvols: la més bella i la més gran de les seves obres. Aquest cel blau pintat de blau és una obra immaterial i impossible, no feta per les mans de l’artista, amb colors, pinzells i teles, sinó explicada amb les seves paraules, mites i llegendes. (shrink)

Los profesores de filosofía suelen afirmar que la filosofía debe ocupar un importante lugar en la educación de los niños y adolescentes. La filosofía les ponen en contacto con temas básicos para entender los fundamentos de la democracia y ayuda a que se desarrollen en ellos las capacidades cognitivas y afectivas exigidas en las sociedades complejas, plurales y cambiante de la actualidad. Falta de todas formas definir un poco mejor lo que entendemos por filosofía y cómo debe ser la enseñanza (...) de la misma. La argumentación es correcta, pero no pasa de ser una argumentación filosófica más bien retórica, insuficiente para defender la presencia de la filosofía y poco clara para orientar la acción del profesorado en el aula. Hace falta en estos momentos desarrollar un amplio trabajo de investigación educativa centrado en la enseñanza de la filosofía. En esa investigación debemos confirmar la supuesta aportación de la filosofía y para ello hace falta, partiendo de un marco teórico solido y riguroso: a) definir con precisión que dimensiones desarrolla efectivamente la enseñanza de la filosofía; b) precisar cómo pueden ser observadas esas dimensiones en el aula; c) seleccionar los instrumentos que hagan posible medir el progreso en esas dimensiones; y d) diseñar las prácticas pedagógicas que ayuden a desarrollar esas dimensiones. Esto es lo que se presenta en este trabajo. Dedicado a la enseñanza de la filosofía en el bachillerato desde hace más de 25 años, me ha interesado siempre mucho la justificación de la presencia de esa asignatura, preocupación que se ha incrementado en los últimos años debido a la reforma del sistema educativo español que has supuesto, en parte, una disminución de la presencia de la filosofía, al menos tal y como era concebida anteriormente. Este interés, que comparto con la mayor parte de mis compañeros de prefesión, me ha llevado a profundizar en tres aspectos que quiero abordar en este trabajo. En primer lugar, el término de filosofía y de enseñanza de la filosofía son tan amplios, o tan vagos, que no estoy muy seguro de que, cuando defendemos la presencia de la filosofía en la educación, todos estemos hablando de lo mismo. En segundo lugar, la argumentación que los colegas ofrecen para defender la presencia de la filosofía es, con frecuencia, por no decir siempre, absolutamente retórica e insuficiente para el objetivo que persiguen. En tercer lugar, carecemos de un marco teórico de investigación que permita con cierto rigor avanzar en la verificación del papel que la filosofía puede desempeñar en la enseñanza. (shrink)

https://revistes.uab.cat/enrahonar/article/view/v52-gamper2.

La obra de Francisco Romero (1891-1962) ha revolucionado el pensamiento argentino no sólo en el sentido de crear un nuevo sistema filosófico, sino en el de sentar una genuina filosofía americana. Su trabajo se extendió no sólo al campo filosófico, sino también al editorial y universitario. En este contexto y a través del epistolario entramos en la práctica y los contenidos de sociabilidad, para delinear las contribuciones de la categoría en el campo de la historia de las ideas. Desde esta (...) perspectiva partimos en el estudio del epistolario de Romero con filósofos de EEUU. Es acerca de un epistolario, esto es, un corpus de cartas que sostuvo con filósofos norteamericanos y europeos con residencia en EEUU entre 1942-1962. Entendemos que tal reservorio nos abre un camino para estudiar la escritura epistolar bajo códigos de sociabilidad. The work of Francisco Romero (1891-1962) has revolutionized the argentinian thought not in the sense of creating a new philosophy system, but in the one of setting out a genuine american philosophy. His work extended not only to the philosophical field but also to the publishing and universitary ones. In this context and through epistolary paths we enter the practice and contents of sociability, to outline the contributions of the category to the field of the history of ideas. As from this perspective we dwell on the study of the epistolary of Romero with philosophers in the United States. It is about an epistolary, that is to say, a corpus of letters that he held with american and european philosophers living in the US between 1942-1962. We understood that such reservoir opens us a way to place epistolary writing in a sociability code. (shrink)

Religion et rationalité. Philon d'Alexandrie et sa postérité propose un nouveau regard sur les travaux de Philon d'Alexandrie : prenant appui sur les mots de Moïse aussi bien que sur des concepts philosophiques, il les associe dans son commentaire de l'Écriture pour créer une nouvelle manière de penser. Les dix études rassemblées dans ce volume apportent un nouvel éclairage sur cette méthode et son originalité. Elles mettent également en évidence la pérennité de cette démarche aussi bien dans le néo-platonisme que (...) chez les Pères de l'Église et dans l'exégèse médiévale. (shrink)

New technologies, such as functional magnetic resonance imaging and transcranial magnetic stimulation, are currently touted as, not only giving us a better picture of the structure of the brain, but also a better understanding of our thinking. As Alan Snyder demonstrates when he claims his aim is to understand the ‘architecture of thought’ by investigating the brain. Against this backdrop, I will argue that new technologies present a worrying extension of mathematical natural science into the domain of human affairs. Extrapolating (...) upon Heidegger, I will put forward that neuroscientific experiments force thinking to conform to the mathematical conception of nature, rather than reveal something about the ‘true’ nature of our thinking. In a time when the expansion of mathematical natural science threatens to reduce every domain to that which is quantifiable, I will conclude by suggesting that the responsibility of the philosopher is to question the presuppositions of modern science and psychology.Nuevas tecnologías como la imagen de resonancia magnética funcional y la estimulación magnética transcranial se consideran presumiblemente capaces de darnos no solo una mejor imagen de nuestro cerebro, sino también una mejor comprensión de nuestro pensamiento, tal como demuestra Alan Snyder cuando afirma que su objetivo es entender la “arquitectura del pensamiento” mediante la investigación del cerebro. Contra este marco general, argumentaré que las nuevas tecnologías nos presentan una preocupante extensión de la ciencia natural matemática al dominio de los asuntos humanos. Extrapolando a partir de Heidegger, propondré que los experimentos neurocientíficos fuerzan al pensamiento a conformarse a la concepción matemática de la naturaleza en vez de revelar algo sobre la verdadera naturaleza de nuestro pensamiento. Nos encontramos en un momento en que o la expansión de la ciencia natural matemática amenaza con reducir todos los dominios a lo que es cuantificable. Concluiré sugiriendo que la responsabilidad del filósofo es cuestionar los presupuestos de la ciencia moderna y de la psicología. (shrink)

Este artigo tem como propósito reconstituir o sentido conferido por D. Luciano Mendes de Almeida (1930-2006), bispo-auxiliar de São Paulo e arcebispo de Mariana, secretário e presidente da CNBB além de vice-presidente do CELAM, à sua própria trajetória biográfica. Verifica-se que, se cotejada com balizas culturais contemporâneas, tal configuração de si porta contornos aparentemente paradoxais: ao invés de fortalecer uma identidade pessoal, ela pressupõe uma dinâmica antropológico-religiosa de autoesvaziamento, concomitante a uma atuação mediadora em prol de relações ternárias entre Deus, (...) os sujeitos e si mesmo, processo denominado por D. Luciano como “interiorização da figura Jesus Cristo”. Com o suporte teórico provindo da semiótica e da história religiosa, tal interiorização é aqui compreendida como um programa narrativo específico, que adquiriu formas singulares ao longo dos séculos, com destaque à espiritualidade inaciana, mas preservando sua concepção como um agir, pela fé, em nome da competência atribuída a um Outro. Sugere-se ainda que, na atualidade, a interiorização possa ser aproximada do relato de testemunho, face ao engajamento ético por ela suscitado, que reconfigura o sujeito no compartilhar de experiências vividas e postas em discurso. Palavras-chave: D. Luciano Mendes de Almeida. Biografia. Interiorização. Testemunho.: This article aims at reconstructing the meaning given by D. Luciano Mendes de Almeida (1930-2006), to his own biographical trajectory. D. Luciano was auxiliary bishop of Saint-Paul and Archbishop of Mariana, secretary and president of the CNBB, and also vice president of CELAM. The configuration he made of himself appears to be paradoxical: instead of strengthening a personal identity, it assumes a dynamic anthropological and religious self-emptiness and a mediating performance in favor of ternary relations between God and the subject itself, a process called by the Archbishop as the "internalization of the figure Jesus Christ." With a theoretical support coming from semiotics and religious history, this process of internalization is understood in this article as a specific narrative program which has acquired unique forms over the centuries, with emphasis on Ignatians spirituality, while preserving its conception as an act of faith on behalf of the competency given to an Other. The article also suggests that ,nowadays, that internalization of the figure of Jesus Christ approaches the reported testimony, given the ethical engagement raised by it, which reconfigures the subject in the sharing of experiences of life that are brought into discourse. Keywords : D. Luciano Mendes de Almeida. Biography. Internalization. Testimony. (shrink)

La sociologie historique des sciences et des techniques est, davantage qu'une discipline, une pratique et une mise en oeuvre d'un ensemble varié de méthodes historiques et sociologiques croisées. Cet ouvrage propose donc une approche méthodologique et empirique de ce segment de recherche aux riches potentialités. Deux problématiques structurent le livre. Il s'agit tout d'abord d'enquêter sur la production et la circulation des concepts dans des contextes variés (marxisme, épistémè foucaldienne). Ensuite, parce que la sociologie historique des sciences et des (...) techniques offre une potentialité d'expressions théoriques larges, l'ouvrage avance la proposition d'une conceptualisation du rapport entre savoir et pouvoir autour d'un régime régulatoire des sciences et des techniques. Le cadrage par le droit, la professionnalisation de certaines activités savantes, les effets de la bureaucratisation et la mobilisation de valeurs spécifiques délimitent un ensemble de pratiques scientifiques et techniques déployé par et pour l'État. La mise à l'épreuve historique de ce schéma théorique permet de signaler, depuis le XVIe siècle, les grandes inflexions d'une science destinée à soutenir et organiser l'action rationnelle du pouvoir."--Page 4 of cover. (shrink)

https://revistes.uab.cat/enrahonar/article/view/v27-fermandois.

Contre l’opposition entre vertu et droit que Pocock a mise au cœur de son modèle de lecture de l’histoire de la pensée politique, cet article avance l’hypothèse qu’il existe une tradition républicaine qui intègre le droit naturel comme pièce essentielle de son dispositif argumentatif. Pocock a interprété les concepts de vertu civique et de droit naturel d’une manière qui ne correspond pas à l’usage qu’en font les auteurs considérés ici . En particulier, c’est parce que le détenteur du droit naturel (...) est conçu davantage comme un sujet moral que comme un centre de désirs qu’il n’y a pas de contradiction entre sa liberté et ses obligations, i.e. sa vertu, de citoyen. De même, c’est parce que la vertu du citoyen se définit moins par la pratique de ses capacités politiques que par l’exercice mesuré de sa liberté qu’il n’est pas contradictoire qu’il revendique un droit naturel à changer de gouvernement et à résister au pouvoir.— Contrary to the now received opposition between virtue and right that lays at the heart of Pocock’s historiographical pattern, this paper suggests that there is a republican tradition which integrates natural right to its argumentative structure. Pocock has construed the concepts of civic virtue and natural right in a way that does not fit the doctrines of the authors here considered . Since the natural right bearer is conceived by those authors more as a moral subject than as a source of desires, he needs to be a virtuous citizen to be free. Likewise, since the citizen’s virtue is not determined by his political capacities but by an exercise of his liberty, it is not absurd that he can claim a natural right to change government and to resist power. (shrink)

Nowhere does the theory-laden character of Husserl’s phenomenological intuitions become as apparent as in his reflections on cultural philosophy. It is his theory that the qualification of one‘s own tradition as one of many manifestations of something valid in itself and binding for all is a unique achievement of Greek-European philosophy. However, that conviction can be found equally in South Asian “doctrines of Oneness” as well as in East Asian instances of the “Golden Rule”. Every person with a command of (...) a natural language is capable of such an insight.The most appropriate model for individual civilizations is not the sphere metaphor, which draws on a Platonic idea of organism, the model that Husserl adopted for his conception of “home” and “foreign worlds”, but rather the image of tinkering introduced by Claude Lévi-Strauss for illiterate societies and used by François Jacob to illustrate the present biological concept of organism.Regarding cultural universals, Husserl also relies on classical ontological reflections rather than on recent biological models. The most inter-esting anthropological universals from the point of view of cultural philosophy are, however, not essential, but contingent universals.En ninguna parte el carácter cargado de teoría de las intuiciones fenomenológicas de Husserl se vuelve tan aparente como en sus reflexiones sobre la filosofía cultural. Según su teoría, la calificación de la propia tradición como una de las muchas manifestaciones de algo válido en sí mismo y vinculante para todos es un logro único de la filosofía greco-europea. Sin embargo, esa convicción se puede encontrar igualmente en las "doctrinas de la unidad" del sur de Asia, así como en las instancias del este asiático de la "regla de oro". Cada persona con un dominio de un lenguaje natural es capaz de tal idea.El modelo más apropiado para las civilizaciones individuales no es la metáfora de la esfera, que se basa en una idea platónica del organismo —el modelo que adoptó Husserl para su concepción de "hogar" y "mundos extranjeros"— sino la imagen de retoque introducida por Claude Lévi Strauss para las sociedades analfabetas y utilizado por François Jacob para ilustrar el concepto biológico actual del organismo.Con respecto a los universales culturales, Husserl también se basa en reflexiones ontoló-gicas clásicas más que en modelos biológicos recientes. Sin embargo, los universales antropológicos más interesantes desde el punto de vista de la filosofía cultural no son esenciales, sino universales contingentes. (shrink)

Implicações da noção de consciência histórica nas ciências humanas e sociais: um modo de projeção para o futuro e de posição em relação ao passado Resumo: O presente texto, de caráter bibliográfico, discute o problema da consciência histórica com o objetivo de pensar o sentido dessa expressão na atualidade e as variações que esse conceito adquiriu ao longo da história das Ciências Humanas e Sociais, com ênfase no século XX. A hipótese é que a discussão a respeito da consciência histórica (...) passou a se ocupar, na modernidade, com uma múltipla relatividade de pontos de vista, o que é destacado por Gadamer em sua análise sobre os preceitos implicados na definição do que significa “ter senso histórico”. É defendida a tese, portanto, de que a noção de consciência histórica não se limita ao conhecimento das experiências vivenciadas no passado, mas se apresenta como condição de possibilidade de projetar o futuro e se posicionar em relação ao passado, especialmente no que diz respeito às ciências humanas e sociais. A defesa desta ideia central é realizada por meio de dois gestos reflexivos, com apresentação, primeiramente, do marco teórico da consciência histórica e, posteriormente, de suas implicações na constituição das Ciências Humanas e Sociais. Palavras-chave: Ciências humanas e sociais. Senso histórico. Passado. Futuro. Implications of the notion of historical consciousness in human and social sciences: a mode of projection for the future and position in relation to the past: This bibliographic text discusses the problem of historical consciousness with the purpose of thinking about the meaning of this expression in the present time and the variations that this concept has acquired throughout the history of the Humanities and Social Sciences, with emphasis on the twentieth century. The hypothesis is that the discussion about historical consciousness has come to concern itself, in modernity, with a multiple relativity of points of view, which is highlighted by Gadamer in his analysis of the precepts involved in defining what “having a historical sense” means. Therefore, the thesis that the notion of historical consciousness is not limited to the knowledge of past experiences is defended, but is presented as a condition of possibility of projecting the future and positioning itself in relation to the past, especially with regard to humanities and social sciences. The defense of this central idea is made through two reflexive gestures, presenting, first, the theoretical framework of historical consciousness and, later, its implications in the constitution of the Human and Social Sciences. Keywords: Human and social sciences. Historical sense. Past. Future. Implicaciones de la noticia de conciencia histórica en las ciencias humanas y sociales: un modo de proyección para el futuro y de posición en relación al pasado Resumen: El presente texto, de carácter bibliográfico, discute el problema de la conciencia histórica con el propósito de pensar sobre el significado de esta expresión en la actualidad y las variaciones que este concepto ha adquirido a lo largo de la historia de las Humanidades y las Ciencias Sociales, con énfasis en el siglo XX. La hipótesis es que la discusión sobre la conciencia histórica ha llegado a ocuparse, en la modernidad, de una relatividad múltiple de puntos de vista, que Gadamer destaca en su análisis de los preceptos involucrados en la definición de lo que significa “tener un sentido histórico”. " Por lo tanto, se defiende la tesis de que la noción de conciencia histórica no se limita al conocimiento de experiencias pasadas, sino que se presenta como una condición de posibilidad de proyectar el futuro y posicionarse en relación con el pasado, especialmente con respecto a humanidades y ciencias sociales. La defensa de esta idea central se realiza a través de dos gestos reflexivos, presentando, primero, el marco teórico de la conciencia histórica y, luego, sus implicaciones en la constitución de las Ciencias Humanas y Sociales. Palabras clave: Ciencias Humanas y Sociales. Sentido histórico. Pasado. Futuro. Data de registro: 28/05/2019 Data de aceite: 24/10/2019. (shrink)

Dos eventos, aparentemente distantes uno del otro y sin vínculos directos entre ellos, pero sin embargo estrictamente relacionados por un legado espiritual común, constituyen el tema de este trabajo. El primero, tuvo lugar en 1971, cuando una «capilla ecuménica» muy especial abrió sus puertas al público. Es conocida bajo el nombre de «Rothko Chapel», debido al proyecto general, realizado por el pintor Mark Rothko. Desde entonces, se ha convertido en una de las obras de arte más valiosas que representan la (...) estética religiosa contemporánea. Las pinturas negras de Rothko, la planta del edificio de «cruz griega» diseñado por el arquitecto Philip Johnson, el obelisco del artista Barnett Newman y la música compuesta para este ambiente por el compositor Morton Feldman, han reemplazado lo que tradicionalmente ha sido llamado «imago templi»; pero, contrariamente a toda tradición cristiana, representan nada (literalmente: no-thing). El segundo evento, tuvo lugar en 1795, cuando dos jóvenes amigos, Hegel y Schelling, estaban haciendo una especie de juramento bajo el signo de una Iglesia Invisible, actualizando un concepto ambiguo que, incluso arraigándose en las Sagradas Escrituras, ya había sido condenado por las iglesias oficiales por sus consecuencias heréticas. La relación entre estos dos eventos está dada por historiadores del arte moderno que han establecido que la pintura abstracta, desde un punto de vista formal, tiene sus raíces en la tradición romántica. Con este trabajo me gustaría contribuir al establecimiento de esta conexión, no solo por medios formales, sino también mostrando una actitud espiritual común hacia las imágenes. El cristianismo, esencialmente figurativo en su estética religiosa, siempre ha tenido que lidiar con la prohibición judía de la creación de imágenes. Esta dificultad ha sido trasferida a los debates contemporáneos en los que artistas con lecturas y educación clásicas, a menudo de origen judío pero activos en sociedades cristianas, intentan crear un nuevo tipo de arte, fuera de toda tradición y sin dogmas. Según mi sugerencia, Rothko Chapel debería considerarse como la realización de un equilibrio frágil en el que tanto el «aniconismo» como la «necesidad de imágenes» han superado su mutua unilateralidad, produciendo una etapa espiritual más elevada. Por lo tanto, tal capilla no sería un simple espacio donde todas las religiones podrían solo reunirse y dialogar, pero debería considerarse algo más sorprendente, es decir, una realización única de lo que lógicamente aparece como una pura contradicción: la realización de un Imago Templi para una Iglesia Invisible.Key words: Rothko; Hegel; Arte Abstracto; Idealismo; Iglesia Invisible. (shrink)

RESUMENPodemos encontrar en los escritos tardíos de Fichte un giro importante desde una perspectiva individualista del Yo hacia una perspectiva comunitaria del Nosotros. Él intentó en sus Discursos a la nación alemana explicitar una relación espiritual que trabaja contra la atomatización de una sociedad dada. Elaboró para ello un interesante concepto de nación cultural. El factor constitutivo de una nación como tal es el lenguaje, y con ello: el camino del pensamiento y la experiencia de la realidad. Fue un paso (...) adelante, no sólo hacia la famosa afirmación hegeliana acerca del progreso histórico a través de las grandes naciones, sino también hacia un giro hermenéutico en la filosofía europea. La filosofía social del Fichte tardío es una interesante mezcla de racionalismo trascendental y conciencia histórica moderna. Llevó su pensamiento a las puertas de lo que el filósofo alemán contemporáneo H. Schnadelbach ha denominado como una segunda ilustración histórico-hermenéutica.PALABRAS CLAVESLENGUAJE, CULTURA, NACIÓN, HISTORIA HERMENÉUTICA, COMUNIDAD, ATOMIZACIÓNABSTRACTWe can find in the late writings of Fichte an important turn from an individualisticperspective of I to the community perspective of We. He tried in his Reden an die deutsche Nation to explicate a spiritual relationship that works against the atomization of a given society. He elaborated thus an interesting concept of cultural nation. The constitutive factor of such a nation is language, and with it: the ways of thinking and of experiencing the reality. It was a step ahead not only towards the famous Hegel’s claim about the historical progress through the great, leading nations, but also towards a hermeneutical turn in the European philosophy. Fichte’s late social philosophy is an interesting mixture of transcendental rationalism and modern historical consciousness. He situated his thought on the threshold to something the German contemporary philosopher H. Schnadelbach called a second, historicalhermeneutical Enlightenment.KEY WORDSLANGUAGE, CULTURE, NATION, HISTORY, HERMENEUTICS, COMMUNITY, ATOMIZATION. (shrink)

«Jo només escric», diu l'autor, «quan les sensacions o idees se'm fan dimonis íntims que intento foragitar amb la literatura. Però no resulta fàcil sentir ni pensar amb naturalitat i seguretat, superar els propis vertígens i censures, deixar avançar la ment amb la confi ança que trobarà el que busca, la mateixa confiança amb què el rei s'asseu sense mirar enrere, segur que trobarà la cadira que algú li haurà acostat.Un entorn raonablement sensual i fins i tot una relativa gimnàstica (...) sexual ajuden sens dubte l'esperit: el que aquest no admet és cap lligam sentimental. Al cervell no li roba energia el moblament sensual o l'erotisme profilàctic, és a dir, tot allò que apaivaga un cos que ha de funcionar alhora com la seva font d'energia i el seu instrument. El pensament ens permet, doncs, el que ens estabilitza però no el que ens mobilitza; tolera el que ens gratifica però no el que ens sedueix. Més que en la repressió, el pensament i la cultura es basen en la fredor, s'aixequen sobre l'egoisme i es mantenen a força de narcisisme. Ens perdonen tal volta els plaers, però mai els amors». (shrink)

: The shepherd embodies a strange and disturbing society. Isolated, marginal, it forms a world apart and evolves in a wild space where mountains, valleys, meadows or forests make up the framework of its activity. In this non-domesticated nature the human presence is suspect. This confusing being is very often represented with an animalized, almost monstrous or deformed body which becomes a metaphor for social order. This grotesque body translates the prejudices of urbanites and elites. It fuels sexual fantasies and (...) symbolizes the disturbances of the natural and social order: freed from the laws of the city, it can try to seduce the young ladies and be insolent in front of the knights. It is a threat to the established order. But the shepherd also carries virtues. It is a model of Christian life: humility and holiness. It belongs to an original humanity, the form closest to divine creation. Two styles of representation of the shepherd therefore oppose the extremes. From texts from the end of the Middle Ages, we will see how the shepherd is an imaginary in opposition to an organized society but that his image has evolved positively until becoming the guardian of traditions and a being who lives in harmony with nature. Key words: stereotypes, shepherd, savagery, holiness, littérature, Middle Ages. Résumé: Le berger incarne une société étrange et inquiétante. Isolé, marginal, il forme un monde à part et évolue dans un espace sauvage où les montagnes, vallées, prés ou forêts composent le cadre de son activité. Dans cette nature non domestiquée la présence humaine est suspecte. Cet être déroutant est bien souvent représenté avec un corps animalisé, quasi monstrueux ou déformé qui devient une métaphore de l’ordre social. Ce corps grotesque traduit les préjugés des urbains et des élites. Il alimente les fantasmes sexuels et symbolise les dérèglements de l’ordre naturel et social : affranchi des lois de la cité, il peut tenter de séduire les demoiselles et se montrer insolent face aux chevaliers. C’est une menace contre l’ordre établi. Mais le berger est également porteur de vertus. C’est un modèle de vie chrétienne : humilité et sainteté. Il appartient à une humanité originelle, forme la plus proche de la création divine. Deux styles de représentation du berger opposent donc les extrêmes. A partir de textes de la fin du Moyen Age, nous verrons comment le berger est un imaginaire en opposition avec une société organisée mais que son image a évolué positivement jusqu’à devenir le gardien des traditions et un être qui vit en harmonie avec la nature. Mots clés : stéréotypes, berger, sauvagerie, sainteté, littérature, Moyen Age. Resumen. El pastor encarna una sociedad extraña y perturbadora. Aislado, marginal, forma un mundo aparte y evoluciona en un espacio salvaje donde montañas, valles, praderas o bosques conforman el marco de su actividad. En esta naturaleza no domesticada, la presencia humana es sospechosa. Este ser confuso a menudo se representa con un cuerpo animalizado, casi monstruoso o deformado que se convierte en una metáfora del orden social. Este cuerpo grotesco traduce los prejuicios de los urbanitas y las élites. Alimenta las fantasías sexuales y simboliza las perturbaciones del orden natural y social: liberado de las leyes de la ciudad, puede tratar de seducir a las jóvenes y ser insolente frente a los caballeros. Es una amenaza para el orden establecido. Pero el pastor también posee virtudes. Es un modelo de vida cristiana, de humildad y santidad. Pertenece a una humanidad original, la forma más cercana a la creación divina. Dos estilos de representación del pastor, por lo tanto, se oponen. A partir de los textos del final de la Edad Media, analizamos la imagen del pastor en oposición a toda sociedad organizada y la evolución positiva de su figura hasta convertirse en guardián de las tradiciones y en un ser que vive en armonía con la naturaleza. Palabras clave: estereotipos, pastor, salvajismo, santitad, literatura, Edad Media. (shrink)

El personatge de Sòcrates ha plantejat sempre a la civilització occidental una paradoxa curiosa: tota la història de la filosofia grega està tradicionalment organitzada al seu voltant, però no sabem qui fou realment Sòcrates. Sòcrates, com diu Jean Brun, és un "fet històric" que escapa a la història i la seva influència ha estat encara més gran si tenim en compte que no va deixar cap obra i que només el coneixem pels testimonis dels seus contemporanis, testimonis que ens diuen (...) massa o massa poc de la seva personalitat i que sovint entren en contradicció. Més enllà del personatge, però, hi ha el missatge i la vigència del pensament socràtic. Malgrat els jutges que el van voler reduir al silenci, aquesta veu que s’alçà a Atenes fa més de 2300 anys no ha deixat mai de sentir-se, i les seves màximes, "coneix-te a tu mateix", "només sé que no sé res"... continuen sent motiu de reflexió per a qualsevol que es plantegi l'actitud ètica de l'home respecte a ell mateix i al món que l'envolta. (shrink)

Este ensayo se propone mostrar que, a pesar de la relevancia de la interpretación alejandrina del intelecto agente aristotélico (que Alejandro identifica con dios), tal interpretación no puede ser correcta por razones de orden sistemático que irían en contra de algunas premisas aristotélicas básicas, tanto ontológicas en general como de su noética y psicología en particular. En el desarrollo de su argumento general Boeri destaca la relevancia de algunos argumentos y explicaciones de Pseudo Filópono, quien (correctamente a su juicio) se (...) esfuerza por anclar el problema del intelecto del lado psicológico, lo cual presupone que el intelecto debe tener un “soporte” corpóreo. Una consecuencia de su examen es, según Boeri, que no sólo la interpretación de Alejandro del intelecto agente no constituye una correcta exégesis de De anima III 5, sino también que, al identificar al intelecto agente con el “intelecto que viene de afuera”, con dios y con la causa primera, Alejandro introduce una importante incoherencia dentro de su propia concepción psicológica que reconoce la tesis de Aristóteles de que los estados anímicos “se dan” a través del cuerpo. (shrink)

Sovint el humans ens hem somiat déus. I Déu n'hi do si hem fet coses admirables: ciència, organització social, art,...motius n'hi ha per estar orgullosos. La vida, però, també ens mostra amb insistència la cara més fosca de nosaltres mateixos, i en aquests moments el més fàcil és passar de l'orgull a la desesperança més absoluta. El camí, però, no pot ser el de l'abandonament. Ni déus ni bèsties! Els déus no trien i, sense esforç ni dubtes, coneixen i realitzen (...) sempre el millor. Els animals, empresonats en la seva naturalesa, tampoc no trenquen gaire el cap a decidir què faran amb les seves vides. Nosaltres no tenim la sort dels uns ni la dels altres, i ens toca amb feines i treballs anar bastint la nostra realitat, aquella que nosaltres farem. Per això existeix l'ètica. "Coneix-te a tu mateix", ordenava l'oracle: només amb les nostres llums i amb les nostres ombres, amb l'instint, amb la ràbia, amb el sentiment, amb la paraula, amb la raó; només coneixent i assumint tot allò que som, tindrem la possibilitat, tal vegada, de construir un món més humà. (shrink)

Resumen: Pierre Bourdieu es uno de esos autores que siempre es posible “redescubrir” dependiendo de los intereses científicos que el lector tenga, y eso por la maestría con la que practicó la ciencia de forma crítica. Para él la epistemología, más que una metaciencia discursiva, es una práctica para todo sociólogo que ejerce el oficio de la investigación científica, y su mismo legado científico lo evidencia. De ahí que su “sociología reflexiva” no sea sino una epistemología práctica que permite a (...) la vez la más variada construcción de objetos científicos con el apoyo de un capital teórico amasado a través de toda su trayectoria intelectual en la fórmula [ ] + campo = práctica cuyos conceptos abordados de forma abierta lo permiten. Así como se pueden aprender lecciones teóricas y metodológicas, este artículo presenta dos lecciones directas de la obra del sociólogo francés, una epistemológica y otra sobre la construcción del objeto de estudio, y una indirecta en las conclusiones sobre las ventajas de estar ante una propuesta abierta e inacabada como la de Pierre Bourdieu para la investigación científica.: Pierre Bourdieu is one of those authors that it is always possible to “rediscover” depending on the scientific interests that the reader has, and that because of the mastery with which he practiced science critically. For him, epistemology, more than a discursive meta-science, is a practice for every sociologist who exerts the office of scientific research, and his very scientific legacy evidences it. Hence, his “reflexive sociology” is nothing more than a practical epistemology that allows at the same time the most varied construction of scientific objects with the support of a theoretical capital amassed throughout his intellectual career in the formula [ ] + field = practice whose openly addressed concepts allow it. Just as it can be learned theoretical and methodological lessons, this article presents two direct lessons from the work of the French sociologist, one epistemological and another about the construction of the object of study, and an indirect one in the conclusions about the advantages of being faced with an open and unfinished proposal like Pierre Bourdieu's for scientific research. (shrink)

Ce livre propose d'aborder la pensée de Charles Taylor par ce qu'il reconnaît être son centre de cohérence : "l'horizon moral de signification". D'entrée de jeu, il situe assez clairement Taylor dans le vaste horizon de la philosophie morale contemporaine. Le texte pose bien l'originalité de la conception taylorienne de l'ontologie ; ses idées d'incarnations, d'engagement et la relation incontournable du moi. Sans complaisance, il montre le rôle central que joue cet horizon dans la philosophie morale taylorienne tout en exposant (...) les zones d'ombre où Taylor est moins clair ou moins explicite dans sa pensée. En illustrant clairement le lien entre l'horizon moral et l'identité d'une part, et celui entre les horizons et le dialogue interculturel d'autre part, le livre enrichit les analyses existantes sur le sujet. Il expose le dilemme taylorien entre contexte et universalisme. L'originalité de Taylor réside dans la manière dont il repose ce dilemme conservant en tension ces deux axes; orienter sa vie en fonction du bien nous oblige à naviguer entre deux eaux. La question du dialogue interculturel est naturellement incontournable dans le présent débat avec Taylor. Les considérations sur le "langage des contrastes" et le passage par les écrits de Raoul Fornet-Betancourt sont tout à fait pertinents. En effet, l'interculturalité ou le dialogue interculturel appelle un nouveau langage, mais les conditions de celui-ci? et son statut ontologique d'ailleurs ne sont pas clairement exprimées dans les écrits tayloriens. Et ils peuvent difficilement l'être, car cela demeure pour lui de l'ordre du mystère et du dévoilement. L'ouverture à l'autre et à l'altérité est un chemin qui mène à plusieurs inconnus et appelle ce que Taylor nomme une transformation."--Page 4 of cover. (shrink)

En su obra de 1884, Die Grundlagen der Arithmetik [Gl.], Frege establece el principio del contexto como uno de sus principios fundamentales y propone valerse de él para dar con el concepto adecuado de número. Así, ofrece una definición de tipo contextual de número cardinal, pero ante una objeción que le resulta insalvable se decide por una definición explicita. La cuestión acerca de cuál ha sido entonces el sentido de establecer con tanto énfasis el principio del contexto admite más de (...) una respuesta. Mi texto polemiza con la interpretación canónica que se ha dado al papel de este principio en Gl., acusándola de permanecer encandilada por lo que se lee de manera inmediata en desmedro de una evaluación más integral y crítica. En particular, defenderé que: i) a diferencia de lo afirmado en Dummett 1991, la definición contextual de número cardinal no es abandonada por Frege al dar su definición explícita de número, ii) el principio del contexto tiene en Gl. un papel erístico fundamental de eliminar posiciones rivales acerca de la naturaleza de los números, iii) dicha definición contextual de número tiene un papel heurístico en el contexto de descubrimiento, en el sentido de que ofrece una intuición clave que permite llegar a la formulación final, iv) a su vez, la definición contextual es una condición necesaria de la definición explícita en el contexto de justificación, siendo que esta última se ha construido a partir de la primera. Por todo ello, sostengo que la función del principio del contexto no es la que prioriza Dummett, i. e., la fallida función de resolver el problema ontológico de la naturaleza de los números, sino que es fundamentalmente metodológica. En efecto, es en su función erística y heurística en donde debe ubicarse su relevancia para la investigación llevada a cabo en Gl. In his masterpiece of 1884, Die Grundlagen der Arithmetik [Gl.] Frege presents the context principle as a fundamental one in his investigation à propos an accurate concept of number. Thus, resting on it he offers a contextual definition of cardinal number; but after analyzing some objections he realizes that this definition does not work and decides himself for an explicit one. The question about what is the purport of the context principle when something that appeared to be the consequence is put aside admits more than a single answer. In this paper I argue against the canonic interpretation for, even while keeping next to the Fregean text, it fails to offer an integral explanation of how the context principle works all along Gl. In particular, I will defend that: i) contrary with Dummett 1991, the contextual definition of cardinal number is not abandoned by Frege when giving his explicit definition of number, ii) the context principle has in Gl. a fundamental eristic role of crossing out rival positions about the nature of numbers, iii) such contextual definition of number has an heuristic role in the discovery context, in the sense it offers a key intuition towards the final formulation, iv) furthermore, the contextual definition is a necessary condition in the justification context for the latest has been built up through the first one. For all this, I maintain that the function of the context principle is not the one Dummett prioritizes, i. e., the failed function of solving the ontological problem of the nature of numbers; the function of the context principle is rather and fundamentally methodological. It is on its eristic and heuristic function that its relevance to the Gl. investigation must be looked for. (shrink)

The progressive publication -along the past two decades- of the courses taught by Heidegger in his first years in teaching has allowed the reconstruction of the process of creation of Being and Time , its multiple textual references and influences. Among these, St. Augustine's thought bears a prominent place, for which reason I intend to consider its noticeable presence in some of the key concepts in the work mentioned. The first to be considered is Sorge , with which Heidegger characterises (...) the fundamental ontological constitution of human existence. His first drafts emerged from the reflection upon the famous "inquietum cor nostrum" and the cura for the vita beata from Confessions X. Based on this same text Heidegger had offered a phenomenological interpretation of temptation, which constitutes one of the first elaborations of the so-called "fall", precisely one of the structural moments of the Sorge. Explicit references or suggestive analogies between both thinkers can also be appreciated between the explanation of "tempus" as "distentio animi" in Confessions XI and the heideggerian thesis of "temporality" as the basis of the constitution of human subjectivity; the road from the search of God to the exploration of the interiority of the one who looks for Him and the way back from the question about the "being" to the question about the one who understands the "being", in other no less significant cases.La progresiva publicación a lo largo de las últimas dos décadas de los cursos dictados por Heidegger durante sus primeros años de docencia ha permitido reconstruir el proceso de gestación de Ser y Tiempo , sus múltiples referencias textuales e influencias. Entre ellas, ocupa un lugar destacado el pensamiento agustiniano, por lo cual me propongo considerar aquí su fuerte presencia en algunos de los conceptos centrales de dicha obra. El primero a tener en cuenta es el de "Sorge" con el que Heidegger caracteriza la constitución ontológica fundamental del existir humano. Sus primeros esbozos habían surgido de la reflexión en torno al célebre "inquietum cor nostrum" y a la cura por la vita beata de Confesiones X. A partir de este mismo texto Heidegger había realizado también una interpretación fenomenológica de la tentación, que constituye una de las primeras elaboraciones de la llamada "caída", precisamente uno de los momentos estructurales de la "Sorge". Referencias explícitas o sugerentes analogías entre ambos pensadores pueden apreciarse también entre la explicación de Confesiones XI del "tempus" como "distentio animi" y la tesis heideggeriana de la "temporalidad" como fundamento de la constitución de la subjetividad humana; el tránsito desde la búsqueda de Dios a la exploración de la interioridad de aquel que lo busca y el retroceso desde la pregunta por el "ser" a la pregunta por el que comprende el "ser", entre otros casos no menos significativos. (shrink)

Poppe r e nt i e nde l a r a c i ona l i da d e ntérminos de nuestra actitud intelectual.Nuestra racionalidad no es una facultad ni un don intelectual.No es al go dado a un i ndi vi duo, deacuerdo con él. Es una actitud que hemosadquirido de nuestra relación intelectualcon otros. Popper no usa “racionalismo”como un término filosófico que significaintelectualismo en oposición a empirismo.El artículo muestra claramente que Popperent i ende el r aci onal i (...) smo no como l agr a nde z a de l a r a z ón, s i no c omo l acomprensión de uno del límite de la razón.Sin embargo, surge una pregunta; ¿qué tanbien ha comprendido tal racionalista ellímite de su propio racionalismo? ¿Cómodebemos entender este límite? Popperafi rma que un raci onal i sta ha notadoel límite del racionalismo al prever elcarácter auto-destructivo del racionalismoc ompr e he ns i vo. A f i n de ha c e r má scomprensible su afirmación tenemos queexplicar el racionalismo comprehensiveque Popper aprehendió.Popper understands the rationality interms of our intellectual attitude. Ourrationality is neithera faculty nor an intellectual gift. It isnot something given to an individual,according to him. It is an attitude thatwe have acquired from our intellectualintercourse with others. Popper does notuse “rationalism” as a philosophical termthat means intellectualism in oppositionto empiricism.This paper clearly shows that Popperunde r s t a nds r a t i o na l i s m no t a s t heal mi ght i nes s of r eas on, but as one’ srealization of the limit of reason. However,there arises a question; how has such arationalist realized the limit of his ownrationalism? How we should understandthis limit? Popper asserts that a rationalisthas noticed the limit of rationalism byenvisaging the self-defeating character ofthe comprehensive rationalism. In order tomake more understandable his assertion,we must at first explain the comprehensiverationalism apprehended by Popper. (shrink)

Resumen. El presente documento tiene como finalidad plasmar la importancia que tiene el tomar encuenta los deseos y necesidades de los espectadores para el éxito económico de las organizaciones deproducción cinematográfica mexicanas. Se establecen las funciones culturales y económicas quedeben considerar los directores y productores de las organizaciones aquí estudiadas. Por otro lado, seubica los diferentes grados de insatisfacción en los que cae un espectador al que no le agradó lapelícula. Se propone el concepto “Síndrome Lozano-Barragán”* para ubicar a aquellasorganizaciones (...) de producción cinematográfica que culpan a los espectadores que quedaroninsatisfechos, del fracaso en taquilla, además de argumentar que dichos espectadores no supieronentender la película o que no saben de la naturaleza de la misma. Por último, hacemos algunasrecomendaciones que pueden seguir las organizaciones de producción cinematográfica para evitareste síndrome e incrementar la satisfacción de los espectadores.Palabras Claves. Organizaciones de producción cinematográfica, industria cultural, síndrome Lozano-Barragán, espectadores, insatisfacción.. The main purpose of this document is to state the importance of taking into considerationthe desires and needs of the spectators by the Mexican film production organizations has for theireconomical success. It establishes the cultural and economic functions that filmmakers studied onthis document must consider. On the other hand, it locates the different degrees of the dissatisfactionin which a spectator can falls into when he or she doesn´t like the movie. We propose the “Lozano-Barragan syndrome”* concept, to distinguish those film production organizations that blame thedissatisfied spectator, for the box office failure, as well as, they argued that those spectators didn´tunderstand the movies or that they don´t understand the nature of it. Finally, we make somerecommendations that could de followed by the film production organizations to avoid this syndromeand increase the spectator satisfaction.Keywords. Film production organizations, cultural industry, Lozano-Barragan syndrome,spectators, dissatisfaction. (shrink)

Resumen Kierkegaard, en su Diario, ha dado un juicio filosófico favorable sobre los actos con los que Lutero ha iniciado la Reforma, pues con estos ha afirmado la autoridad de competencia del individuo que es un prius respecto al Estado y a la Iglesia. Por otro lado, Kierkegaard ha señalado que estos actos han sido viciados por razones filosóficas que han llevado no sólo a la formación de la Iglesia de Estado, sino a la del Estado-Iglesia. Primeramente, se trata de (...) razones de carácter político-filosóficas: una concepción del Poder confusa, una desvalorización del individuo a favor de la comunidad y del Estado, una perspectiva equivocada de la felicidad-salvación del hombre. Además, Kierkegaard ha señalado razones estrictamente filosóficas que han llevado al Estado-Iglesia: una equivocada concepción del ser y una errónea visión de lo que es la razón y el conocimiento. Estas razones, positivas y negativas, señalan cuestiones aún no resueltas en nuestros tiempos.Kierkegaard in his Diary has ¿ven a favorable philosophical judgment on the facts with which Luther has initiated the Reforma, for with these has affirmed the compeUnce authoritj of the individual who is a prius with respect to the State and the Church. On the other hand, Kierkegaard has pointed out that these acts have been vitiated by philosop bical reasons that have led not onlj to the formation of the Church of State, but to that of the Church-State. Firstlj, these are politicalphilosophical reasons: a confused conception of power, a devaluation of the individual in favor of the community and the state, a mistaken perspective of man's happiness and salvation. In addition, Kierkegaard has pointed out strictlj philosoph-ical reasons that have led the Church State: a mistaken conception of being and an erroneous visión of what is reason and knowledge. These reasons, positive and negative, point to issues not jet resolved in our times. (shrink)

Resumen Kierkegaard, en su Diario, ha dado un juicio filosófico favorable sobre los actos con los que Lutero ha iniciado la Reforma, pues con estos ha afirmado la autoridad de competencia del individuo que es un prius respecto al Estado y a la Iglesia. Por otro lado, Kierkegaard ha señalado que estos actos han sido viciados por razones filosóficas que han llevado no sólo a la formación de la Iglesia de Estado, sino a la del Estado-Iglesia. Primeramente, se trata de (...) razones de carácter político-filosóficas: una concepción del Poder confusa, una desvalorización del individuo a favor de la comunidad y del Estado, una perspectiva equivocada de la felicidad-salvación del hombre. Además, Kierkegaard ha señalado razones estrictamente filosóficas que han llevado al Estado-Iglesia: una equivocada concepción del ser y una errónea visión de lo que es la razón y el conocimiento. Estas razones, positivas y negativas, señalan cuestiones aún no resueltas en nuestros tiempos.Kierkegaard in his Diary has ¿ven a favorable philosophical judgment on the facts with which Luther has initiated the Reforma, for with these has affirmed the compeUnce authoritj of the individual who is a prius with respect to the State and the Church. On the other hand, Kierkegaard has pointed out that these acts have been vitiated by philosop bical reasons that have led not onlj to the formation of the Church of State, but to that of the Church-State. Firstlj, these are politicalphilosophical reasons: a confused conception of power, a devaluation of the individual in favor of the community and the state, a mistaken perspective of man's happiness and salvation. In addition, Kierkegaard has pointed out strictlj philosoph-ical reasons that have led the Church State: a mistaken conception of being and an erroneous visión of what is reason and knowledge. These reasons, positive and negative, point to issues not jet resolved in our times. (shrink)

Aquest treball explora la concepció de l'anàlisi de Moore tot relacionant-la amb la sevadefensa del sentit comú i el llenguatge ordinari com el seu vehicle d'expressió. La secció 1 estudiael paper que l'anàlisi representa en la seva filosofia, així com la seva importància perafrontar problemes filosòfics. La secció 2 descriu en què consisteix l'anàlisi segons Moore, discuteixels criteris que ha de satisfer una anàlisi correcta, i classifica els diferents tipus d'anà-lisi trobats en els escrits de Moore, alhora que nega que (...) se'ls pugui considerar lingüístics oconceptuals. La secció 3 aclareix les nocions de sentit comú i llenguatge ordinari, subratllantla preeminència d'aquell. La discussió es proposa de resoldre dues qüestions: a ) c o mes pot reconèixer una proposició del sentit comú, i b ) com es pot reconèixer si tal proposicióés vertadera. Finalment, ens concentrem en el paper concedit al sentit comú i/o llenguatgeordinari com a pedra de toc a l'hora d'acceptar o rebutjar arguments filosòfics. (shrink)

Aquest treball explora la concepció de l'anàlisi de Moore tot relacionant-la amb la sevadefensa del sentit comú i el llenguatge ordinari com el seu vehicle d'expressió. La secció 1 estudiael paper que l'anàlisi representa en la seva filosofia, així com la seva importància perafrontar problemes filosòfics. La secció 2 descriu en què consisteix l'anàlisi segons Moore, discuteixels criteris que ha de satisfer una anàlisi correcta, i classifica els diferents tipus d'anà-lisi trobats en els escrits de Moore, alhora que nega que (...) se'ls pugui considerar lingüístics oconceptuals. La secció 3 aclareix les nocions de sentit comú i llenguatge ordinari, subratllantla preeminència d'aquell. La discussió es proposa de resoldre dues qüestions: a ) c o mes pot reconèixer una proposició del sentit comú, i b ) com es pot reconèixer si tal proposicióés vertadera. Finalment, ens concentrem en el paper concedit al sentit comú i/o llenguatgeordinari com a pedra de toc a l'hora d'acceptar o rebutjar arguments filosòfics. (shrink)