Arquivo para a ‘Linguagens’ Categoria
Postmodernity, a return to the beginning and the current
09
Aug
The author (Anthony Giddens) we are reading, does exactly in the chapter of “trust” na
approach to nihilism by criticizing Nietszche and Heidegger, with which we disagree, but it does not fail to emphasize the importance of both,
The first to have broken with the Enlightenment, and the second (although he does not say directly) that the “new perspective” (which of the Enlightenment ??) surpassed the “tradition of dogma” the author says that “postmodernism has been associated not only with the end of acceptance of foundations as the ‘end of history'” (p. 60) which is true, but a brief distinction must be made between post-Modernity and postmodernism, the first is the phenomenon that since Nietszche is pointing, but developed with Husserl, Heidegger and Gadamer, the second is the idea that the phenomenon itself is already a new stage of humanity.
It calls for the exercise of trying to approximate the issue of consciousness history (name I consider more correct for historicity, see Truth and Method of Gadamer) of “futurology” and will call “undoing” this idea that after mapping the past can be
Presupposes “a future orientation of this kind” (p.61), then it resumes the “elucidation of modern thought”, but it does not fail to make conventional discourse; “This process as a process of globalization, a term that must have a key position in the lexicon of the social sciences” (p.62), which is still a discourse that “disengages” with tradition, to use
The author’s own argument, one must revise the Enlightenment without appealing to it.
The discourse and here we find contradictions in its model of trust, the “reflective appropriation of knowledge” that tries to deny the progress of the Enlightenment period by saying: “displaced social life from the fixity of tradition,” which he calls “symbolic fixes and systems Dangers “that in fact involve trust is placed in a systemic model because it sees it as distinct from the model of” belief based on weak inductive knowledge “, it is also a belief, the problem is precisely putting it in dialogue with tradition to emerge the new.
It sees knowledge with a “differential power” with some individuals or groups more apt to acquire them, but the process of globalization of knowledge is not the inverse?
Do we agree with the power of values and the impact of unintended consequences, according to their concept that “to social life transcends the intentions of those who apply it for transformative purposes,” is not this the question of historical consciousness?
Its double hermeneutics, which sees it as “the circulation of social knowledge” that must be applied “reflexively” would alter the original circumstances, is pure romanticism.
It will allude to its key category, which is globalization, with some different approaches from other authors, but within the closed view of those who follow the system model, it does not coincidentally begin with considerations about McLuhann.
Without considering the paradox of the neo-positivist Kurt Gödel, who asserted that the system already has its internal contradictions and can only be proved as true by an external assertion, in the case of postmodernity that is already external, we must dialogue with the tradition for That its key concepts: liberalism, capitalism, state, logic, legality, among many others, are made not only in a double hermeneutic but in an open hermeneutics where the preconceptions of any “closed” hermeneutics can be overcome.
The emptiness and transfiguration: spiritual or existential
04
Aug
The transcendence of Kant and all idealism is nothing but the existential 
negation of the object, or we would say in Husserl’s reasoning the object-in-the-world, his worldhood, but what happens in this variation between my perception and the world?
According to Husserl, the objects of the world come from various perspectives (Abschattungen), so a chair before me can be apprehended under various variations of profile (Abschattung).
In order to apprehend according to epoché, the object must be subjected to the various possible variations of profile in order to grasp the essence of that same object, that is, what remains unchanged in it, and this is its phenomenological reduction (epoché) or a debug of the phenomenon in order to reach the object with total evidence, the essence of the phenomenon, that is, its eidos (whence the modern idea came), but this variation is objective and subjective at the same time, this is called the ” .
We then come to epoché, to make a complete emptiness using the transcendental reduction, where we plunge into a state that may seem a loss of consciousness of the real world, but instead of making the phenomenon more problematic, by re-presenting the phenomenon transcendentally, It is more conscious, more evident. In the biblical passage of the transfiguration, where Jesus appears “transfigurated”, the apostles wanted to stay there because of the “eidetic” world.
Next we present the beautiful picture of Giovanni Bellini that represents the figure, we see the Trinity having Jesus in the center and two more figures Because the idealistic reason is incapable of becoming truly eidetic, that is, seeing the same person in three profiles, and more serious, one human, one extremely divine and happy the third is neither a dove nor a fire But another human figure, the Renaissance Bellini was not yet an idealist (see a peasant in his normal life), but there was still the dualism of heaven and earth, the apostles wanted to remain there.
But Jesus wants to descend from Mount Tabor and Back to earth: The gospel of Matthew says that Peter thought they were three biblical people, saying, “Peter answered and said, Lord, it is good for us to be here. If you wish, I will make three tents here: one for you, one for Moses, and one for Elijah. Peter was still speaking, when a luminous cloud covered them with his shadow … came a voice saying: This is my beloved son … “, human and transcendent, needed councils to establish the divine and human nature of Jesus.
The Trinity is still ‘hidden’ for those who only deify or humanize subjects and objects, then the ‘relational world’ remains complicated, this is the cultural and spiritual crisis of the modern world, ner subjects neither objects, this is existential nihil.
The emptiness and the epoché in Husserl
03
Aug
If there is any similarity between the Husserlian epoché and the methodical doubt of
Descartes, it is simple appearance, for the epoché (put in brackets) served for Husserl to enter the core of the appearances of things to consciousness.
Thus this supposed resemblance between the two philosophers does not authorize it to mean that the epoché, in putting the world aside, doubts the existence of things, and this doubt will lead to idealism, with the critique of “pure” Reason of Kant and others That there will come a dualism between the objective and subjective worlds.
With Husserl’s epoché one does not properly pretend to doubt the existence of the world and its objects, much less to reject the intuition we have to know it, reducing consciousness to some kind of transcendence.
The world will be anchored only in the aspect as it presents itself in consciousness “eeduced to consciousness”, as we have already argued here, Husserl’s phenomenological method promotes a revision in the Cartesian cogito.
The Husserlian method of phenomenological reduction brings with it other notions that must be presented here: the transcendent and the transcendental, being the transcendent, the consciousness as Husserl sees it, is the everyday and habitual perception we have of the things of the world, not a chair But this chair, this tree, this book, so the transcendental “is the perception that consciousness has of itself” (Brazilian Philosohpy dictionary ABBAGNANO, 2000, p. 973).
One can then say that “the transcendent is the outer world” while the transcendental “is the inner world” of consciousness (HUSSERL, 2008, p.18), thus redefined the notions of noema and noesis, since they existed in antiquity .
This emptiness to apprehend the object, since it happens in ‘pure consciousness’ or ‘transcendental’, it is the experiences entirely lose their psychological and existential character to preserve only the pure relation of the fully purified subject to the object as conscious, and this is To uncover, to know.
There is a distinction between the perceived object and the noema: “the noema is distinct from the object itself, which is the thing, eg the object of the tree’s perception is the tree, but the noema of that perception is the complex of predicates And ways of being given by experience. ” (Brazilian Philosohpy dictionary ABBAGNANO, 2000, p.724).
To what extent this experience can be “transcendental” is the ultimate question.
Aspects of phenomenology
02
Aug
Both the so-called “pure” sciences and other experimental sciences depart
from empirical data or “practical” hypotheses to develop their postulates, Husserl warned that the instability of empirical data as well as much of the theoretical postulates do not provide the necessary rigor as regards To philosophical inquiry.
In essential aspects, positivist science or its field of analysis to the experimental, or considers as “phenomenon” regions that are veiled by some methodological rigor limiting a general analysis more comprehensive and not explanatory of certain phenomena.
What Husserl understood as a “comprehensive analysis” is that which refers to consciousness and this in turn is based on experiences (Erlebnis) of the world occur in and through consciousness, henceforth its postulate “all consciousness is consciousness of something”.
It is in this perspective that Husserl takes from his master Franz Brentano his most essential category of intentionality, so intention is a general characteristic of this consciousness.
This is the first point in the analysis of the phenomenon, so different from the Cartesian cogito which gains a new meaning from the intentionality (the consciousness of something) that, contrary to being “clear and distinct” as Descartes wanted, is directed (intends) to something.
In addition to the intentionality Husserl considers intuition and apodic evidence, being the intention of an object (the example is a book on the table), there being the “meaningful content” (Bedeutungsintention) of something, then “we mean intentionally” (meinen) some Object, without even considering its presence,
Intuition is then the fulfillment of an intention, then it may consider “evidence” to be the consciousness of intention, therefore it is intuitive but insofar as there is a “consciousness of the phenomenon”, and in this sense it is apodictic, ie it is self-evident , there is no need for empirical evidence.
A last aspect is the hylé, the “subjective matter” that composes any perception, although there are the “hiletic data” that would be “constituted by the sensible contents, which comprise, besides the external sensations, also the feelings, impulses, etc. ” (ABBAGNANO dictionary, 2000, page 499). Are not only the “matter” upon which consciousness is given, and are not empirical.
Then appears the Husserlian epoché, which is the parenthesis, we will explore later.
The importance of Husserl’s phenomenology
01
Aug
The importance of Husserl’s phenomenology is that he performed at one stroke
the criticism of psychologism, through his most advanced post of his master Franz Brentano, to the characteristic relativism of our time and modernity and to historicism in a work little known to JF Lyotard) he stressed: “the Cartesian hope of a Mathesis universalis is reborn in Husserl” (1957: 6), although Lyotard later criticizes it.
The theme of epoché is not to return to a return to the classical theme of antiquity, but to what he called the “thesis of a presupposition: man is immersed in a kind of general ‘, ie an implicit understanding of the world; The world is then essentially familiar to man, and it is within this naturality that one intends to say what it is to know the real:
“I am aware of a world that extends endlessly in space, which has an endless development in time … I discover [the world] by an immediate intuition, I have experience of it” (1991: 37).
He understands by a natural attitude, that which does not cease “to realize the world as ontologically valid … My life in all its acts is part oriented to the being that belongs to that world, … are interests by things of the The world, being realized in acts concerning these things, as long as they are correlate of my intention. “(1989, 519).
So it is about this “being in the world” (Husserl was a pupil of Heidegger and his expression is earlier), it is a Selbstverständlichkeit, and this can not be doubted, then how is his epoché realized? Is to become skeptical and like this as abstention from the inconstancy in the “spectacle of the world,” or what Husserl defined as “distance from naive natural validations” (Husserl, 1989, 154), but clarifies that it is not the “Criticism of knowledge”.
The consciousness of the natural environment as an “existing reality” (perhaps perhaps Heidegger took his Dasein), but he questions the duration of this attitude: “It is something that persists as long as the attitude lasts, that is, as much as the life of consciousness Vigilante follows its natural course “(Husserl, 1991, p.96).
What is important and this is in his booklet Cartesian Meditations, it is not a question of establishing a “universal doubt” because it does not put the being in doubt, but only its attributes, so assumes universalist tensions, and now it is the phenomenology that can, with propriety , To be conceived as transcendental, since it allows for epoché a “total alteration of the natural attitude of life” (Husserl, 1989, 168), putting objectivity as such in check.
The epoché is then “a certain suspension of the insurrection which is compounded by a persuasion of the truth that remains unshaken” (Husserl 1991: 100).
When we operate this original epoch, Lyotard’s study of phenomenology in 1956 also pointed this out, shows the insufficiency that Descartes’s radical procedure as a doubt had limitations, as Husserl says:
“Since every thesis or judgment can be modified with full freedom, and that every object on which judgment is referred can be put in parentheses, there would remain no room for unmodified judgments, let alone for a science.” Husserl, 1989, p.102).
HUSSERL, E. The crisis des sciences européennes et la phénoménologie transcedentale. Trad. G. Large. Paris: Gallimard, 1989.
HUSSERL, E. Idées directrices pour une phénoménologie. Trad. Paul Ricoeur. Paris> Gallimard, 1991.
What is missing on the 4th. Industrial Revolution
31
Jul
I read the book of the creator of the World Forum of Economics, 
Klaus Schwab, it is amazing the scenario that describes, going through the digital world calls the digital cash accounting system, the blockchain, “book-reason distributed” (mistranslated in portuguese that is book-box) by stating that “it creates trust by allowing people who do not know (and thus have no underlying basis of trust) to collaborate without having to go through a neutral central authority – that is, a central accounting or depository. “(Schwab, 2016, 27), going from the physical category to the biological world, but perhaps something is lacking: a” soul “for all this.
Skeptics and fundamentalists will continue to cry: unfair! Power of technoscience! An authentic dehumanization! Yes it may be, but simply protesting or twisting the nose will not make the rapid and dizzying advance of technology receding, not even the ecological appeal, more technology is often more ecology, see the LEDs, solar energy and control now possible by Sensing devices in plants, forests and even microorganisms.
Perhaps a problem that deserves serious questioning is inequality, but Schwab did not shy away from it by explaining the emergence of “innovation-oriented ecosystems, offering new ideas, business models, products and services on pages 94-95. Those people who can only offer less skilled jobs or common capital “(Schwab, 2016, p.94), and concludes” the present world is very unequal “(p.95).
The phenomenon of inequality is undoubtedly the most worrying, even in countries that can be thought less unequal, the Gini index for example in China, the author points out, rose from 30 in the 1980s to 45 in 2010.
It further points out that levels of inequality: “increase segregation and reduce the educational outcomes of children and young adults.” (Ibid., 95), this has changed, for example, the so-called “middle class” pattern in the USA and United Kingdom has the price of “a luxury good,” says the author.
Contrary to what one might think, the Global Risks Report of the 2016 World Forum speaks of “de-empowerment” of the citizen, although there are campaigns like “get-out-the-vote”, since in Many countries voting is not mandatory, but the content we consume online are miserable, lack truth and fact, and they influence it.
The author does not lack the concepts of identity, morality and ethics, expressed in the chapter on page 100, talks about OpenAI, an initiative chaired by Sam Altman, president of Y Cominator and Elon Musk and CEO of the revolutionary Tesla Motors, who believes that the best way To develop the AI is to make it free for all and to make it be invested to improve human beings, but its program is abstract and unrealistic, although it presents it in the H frame the ethical limit.
It is necessary to discover in the fissures of the technological advance aspects of development of human sensibility, of appreciation for the Other, where collaborative and coworking environments favor this, but what you hear is still a fundamentalist shout against technology.
Differends, dialogues and treasure
28
Jul
Finding treasures and insights in our lives is something rare, we would say almost
impossible, but with attentive eyes and a totally clean mind it is possible for someone to find it, and as the Bible passage says, sell everything you have to buy a treasure (Matthew 13 , 44), but where the treasure is, we are in contention or available to all.
We must remember other passages even though Jesus goes against the Pharisees, it is not a dispute only, but to find their “differences” those who should actually be closer, since they were the religious of the time, but in fact, If distant.
Yes it is possible to be only attached to a “dispute”, as well as fans of sporting events in which polarization is necessary, but this is not a question of this, but a treasure available to all, and this depends on actually understanding what treasure is If speaking, not only our good but that of all, without exception.
We must remember other passages even though Jesus goes against the Pharisees, it is not a dispute only, but to find their “differends” those who should actually be closer, since they were the religious of the time, but in fact, If distant.
Yes it is possible to be only attached to a “dispute”, as well as fans of sporting events in which polarization is necessary, but this is not a question of this, but a treasure available to all, and this depends on actually understanding what treasure is If speaking, not only our good but that of all, without exception.
Going to those who could represent the “worst enemies” is a proactive attitude to the differences, as well as wisdom because they are the main pole of conflict, it is also a path to clarification that can lead to the discovery of discoveries and real treasures, but the “dispute” we would say as rivals in sports where only one wins is pure ignorance, because it is not the victory of only one as it is in sport, but of enlightenment from the Word, or the phrase as Lyotard wanted.
Exploring what he calls a linguistic shift, an ironic expression with the linguistic turning, one of the three great turns of our time, the other two are the ontological turning and the revenge of the sacred, as some authors call it.
Whoever finds a treasure, contrary to the accumulation of wealth common in our time, must think that true wealth is available to all and not just “the elects”, is to be offered to all.
Postmodernity and ontology
26
Jul
The possible conclusion of the Lyotard of the Postmodern Condition (1979)
is that the pragmatics of the rules governing the language game of science redefined its objectives, methods, and functions (Lyotard, 1979, pp. 47 and 104), where partners Are called to participate directly in the meta-rules that order social, professional and private life.
However, from the opening pages of his book Le différend (1983) he took a much more radical position than the previous inspiration, recognizing the merits of liberation from “different” practices and grammars (this is the central theme of the new Lyotard), linguistic practices (Gadamer also redefined the latter), considered the risk of the “anthropomorphic subject” that transcendental that was intended owner and user of the language.
The subject is not the “virtual user” the sender of the language, it must be defined in three other instances: recipient, meaning and reference; There is a “happening” and a “presenting”.
What gives this opening power of language is the phrase, “opening and closing power of the universe,” temporal giving instance of Being, an ontological event that presents a universe arising from silence and Nothingness that separates each phrase from any other phrase.
Language operates a “withdrawal” that reduces the singular and contingent being presented by the phrase to an ontic state dominated by “almost necessary” threads that cover the Nothingness and silence consubstantial with each phrase.
Thus, “destinator, recipient, meaning and reference” are the instances that constitute the open universe, by a phrase, the instances that all the sentence presents at the moment of its occurrence, at the moment of its unpredictable and contingent event.
There are several references of the above said, as the function of Lyotard’s envisager in ch. 1, pages 30 and 31, and also notes on Frege in Chapter 2, especially note 3.
It is not so simple, but there is in this work a passage from the “pragmatic” to the “ontological”.
Lyotard, J. The Postmodern Condition. Paris: Minuit, 1979.
Lyotard, J. Le différend, Paris: Minuit, 1983
Postmodernity and politics logics
25
Jul
In 1979 Jean-François Lyotard launched the classic book, “The 
Postmodern Condition,” where he already proposed the political crisis, calling it a sophist in the sense that reformulates the problem of democracy as follows: speech politics the fashion of the sophists founded on Democratic opinion, and politics of universalist dimension of Kant, consecrated in the model of Hegelian state and in the social contract.
The point of contention with Habermas is that Lyotard regards as unsatisfactory and fragile the articulation between what is direct and de facto, the articulation that makes it on the one hand too abstract and, on the other, too factual, nor the consensus of the contract that is Fragile, and what could be considered the practicality of “facts” with absent utopia.
I say thus by Lyotard: “Consensus has become an outdated value, and I suspect. Justice, but it is not. It is therefore necessary to arrive at an idea and practice of justice that is not linked to that of consensus. “(Lyotard 1979: 106)
But Lyotard’s critique does not stop there, he found it in a game of language called a double analogy, between the “practical-political” and another “cognitive” of science that would be “de facto” (factual reality).
Thus the first part is based on a critique of the systemic criterion of communication proposed by Luhmann, but the theories of relativity and quantum, the “open systems”, the theories of catastrophes and chaos, among others, do not fail to make references.
The second part of the Lyotardian solution comes from legitimizing a path of law, aiming to criticize the methodological foundations of consensus theory, from Bachelard, Kuhn, Feyerabend and Serres, which are attempts to revitalize the “scientific” way of working the facts. As a consequence two complementary types of pragmatism.
Although he disagrees with pragmatics, what he calls “legitimation by paralogia” that is the participation of “social communities”, there is the misconception between combining science and politics, there is a positive aspect of making criticism in which the power of the The West can not regard itself as superior to the play of narrative language, which we find in primitive cultures, since a metanarrative borrowed from Plato to philosophy (Lyotard 1979: 51).
The universe of post-truth discourse is therefore a paralogy, invented by the cynical reason of present times, there is nothing else that Lyotard calls in another book Le différend, the differences, that are different in a logic of conflict, with discourses made in Different.
Lyotard, J.F. Le Condition postmoderne. Paris: Minuit, 1979.
Metaphor, parables and tragedy
13
Jul
In times of crisis culture and values, the most common thing is the hasty judgment 
about a certain behavior or person, but not everything that seems to be is the same, is the case, for example, to combat a prejudice that falls into another type Of judgment.
When one determines that a certain form of behavior or relationship is more politically correct, one can eliminate the conventional or the traditional, in the history of humanity the relationship between tradition and the new popular “fashions” has always been important in this history. We do not fall into pure fashions or disasters.
We are still experiencing the effects of a post-World War, and of many wars with a religious and cultural focus and gradually returning to ideological ones, in fact it is a crisis of models.
“Today is realized what was written in biblical times about the prophecy of:” You shall hear, without understanding. You will have to look without seeing anything. 15For the hearts of this people have become insensible, “which is quoted by the evangelist Matthew 13: 14-15, in explaining why Jesus spoke in parables, but how insensible today is to look at the Other without prejudice, to allow diversity To be present in society and to respect it.
It is not only the fact that we have problems with immigration, but that the world through TVs and the Web is seen and we come into contact with all kinds of culture and religiosity of the planet, but the respect that we must have for all is still small, so only One can speak in metaphors.
Paul Ricouer’s book The Living Metaphor is part of the reading of Aristotle’s Poetics, a book that has remained only a part of the original, to say that its construction is the basis of Western literature, where we can highlight mimesis, myth and catharsis as a basis , And as it forms the tragedy, the catharsis and the mimesis, perhaps the latter the most unknown.
Both in the tragedies of Sophocles and in the epics of Homer, the mimetic arts approach, to consider that both represent beings superior to the common ones. Aristophanes, author of comedies, also imitates people acting, doing the drama, we can say so the biblical parables are also mimesis in excerpts such as: “the sower went forth to sow,” “the administrator entrusted the talents to his employees,” and many others.
As much as the parable, and some forms of metaphors, tragedy identifies itself with the mimeses of superior quality to the comedy thus thought Aristotle and later Nietzsche, and has like object, actions of elevated character (ethical model); Like medium, ornate language; As mode the dialogue and the scenic spectacle; And includes catharsis.
