Arquivo para a ‘Social Network’ Categoria
An incomplete ontology: the affirmation of Being
21
Feb
The Wheel of Fortune is chance because the logic of laissez faire, chance brought to
the economy, is also the logic of the affirmation of Being, in the classic sense; Being is and Non-Being is not, there is no becoming.
Non-Being is also Being, the affirmation, the will to Power, takes with it the logic of war, dualism, Manichaeism and its destiny is war, the difficulty of understanding the Other, the dialogue made as a form of hypocrisy , because in the end, it is the negation of the Other and the affirmation of Being, in the logic “we have the truth”, even if it is said in a religious way, it is its negation.
The impossibility of coexistence, from where physical violence arises, even psychological and moral violence, the unconscious desire to demoralize and undermine the Other, which is in this non-Being logic, and thus the moment that passes is lived in a false way, as fleeting and with the sense of maximum affirmation of the Being.
It seems crazy to say that non-Being is also, but it is precisely in its exercise that we deny war, we deny conflict as necessary, we make dualism become sincere dialogue and we can enter the logic of the Other and discover a complement of Being, while not-Being.
To affirm that the Non-Being is destroys the logic of power, exclusion, conflict, because it allows the Other to exist, denies psychopolitics because there is no need for the “psychic” oppression of the Other, to affirm the Same, the mirror, even which exercised collectively, is a selfish knot and tied exclusively to its own power and pleasure.
So say contemporary speeches about philosophy, which fill audiences and praise philosophers and eloquent religious: “you came to win, assert yourself, say you are the best”, etc.
The complete ontology is also opposed to religious fundamentalism and the Pharisaic, because it is also exercised as a non-Being, says the evangelist Mateus on the Master’s teaching to his disciples (Mt 5.38): “You have heard what has been said (yet the it is in our day): I look for another and tooth for tooth !, But I say to you: “do not face that it is evil” On the contrary, if someone slaps you on the right face, it also offers you the left! ”, here it is the “hidden” logic of non-Being.
Happiness and idealism, between subjects and objects
18
Feb
The development of idealistic thinking, the strongest and most profound of
modernity, gave man a sense of dominance not only over nature, but also over his own possibilities and the reach of his will.
So the exploitation of natural resources, now with signs of exhaustion, also the exploitation of peoples and labor forces made human undertakings take off and now intending to conquer planets and the universe, but we discovered the human limits: desires, powers and wars.
The first and the main one is the finitude of life, even the oldest cultures always elaborated some eschatology about the previous and future life of humanity, modernity meanwhile tried to exploit its finitude to the fullest, what counts is the maximum happiness in short life for all of us, exploring it to the fullest is enough.
But idealism pointed out limits, if it is an unfinished project or if we have already plunged into another project, late modernity or postmodernity does not matter, the essence of this project was finitude, and what was called enlightenment, happiness, will and freedom it showed not only finitude, but also the monstrous aspects of this conception: absence of imagination (the subjectivity said of this way of thinking), the human and natural unbalance of forces, and the absence of peace.
The idealistic building built a society full of objectivity, of wonderful constructions, from the reach of the productive forces almost until their exhaustion, but war and cultural, religious and mainly ideological hatred, a fundamental part of this building.
Separating the human into two pieces, to later search him, subjectivity and objectivity, was nothing but a monumental building that disregarded the human essential: the absence of forms of happiness that contemplate everyone and the search for solidary means of power.
It is not that God died, but that we killed him, if there is no divine bond between men, he can never exist transcendently, in fact, idealistic transcendence is nothing other than the separation between subject and objects, unified by this fallacy of objectivity.
Without recovering real dreams, real happiness, and the social means for this, we sleepwalk in the dark, as stated by Edgar Morin.
The importance of Droysen’s legacy
17
Feb
We stated last week that both the perspective of Droysen’s Hellenism (he coined the term) and the perspective of the true meaning of his story were broader,
long before Gadamer’s criticisms of “romantic” historicism, this author who was a student of Hegel , had already done so and with much property because in addition to being a student, he entered the concept that Hegel is for modern philosophy its founder.
Johann Gustav Droysen (1808-1884) questioned the principle of historicity, and, long before his time, questioned historians about the “scientific” foundations of a certain perspective and relativism, as well as indirectly questioning Dilthey in an attempt to use history to support the Sciences of the Spirit.
Droysen in his Compendium on History (Grundriss der Historik) that was not suitable for History, since it pretends to be science, to borrow without a method from another perspective of knowledge, which is natural science, even if as an “example”.
The solution presented by him, similar to that of Gadamer, synthesized in the methodological notion of Investigative Understanding (forschendes Verstehen), aimed to give History the possibility of an autonomous science, so for him there is something that precedes the explanation x understanding dualism, which is the history, what we called last week the “form” of thinking.
His 1857/1858 compendium of history (Grundiss der Historik) is available in Spanish (1983) and Italian (1989) versions, still in Portuguese.
Of particular interest, at least for me, was Chapter 3, which deals with the hermeneutical problem of understanding, which gives a sense of the applicability of its method.
The link that we can and should make with the moral question, from the previous topic, can be found on page 386 of her work Teologia dela Storia (Italian translation):
“… we need a Kant, who critically examines not the historical matter, but the theoretical and practical movement before and within history, and who demonstrates, like anything similar to the moral law, an imperative category of history, the living source from which the historical life of humanity flows. ”(DROYSEN, 1966, p. 386)
Droysen observes in what he calls “Systematics” three types of ethical communities: “the natural communities”, “the ideal communities” and “the practical communities” (figure above), and relates to them from history, said thus: “ours systematic resulted from the notion that the historical world is the ethical world, but while conceived from a certain point of view; because the ethical world can be considered under other points of view … ”(Droysen, 1994, p. 413).
Its becoming, therefore, is far from the Hegelian dialectic, but at the same time it dialogues with it.
DROYSEN, J. G. (1966) Teologia dela Storia. Prefazione ala Storia dell´Ellenismo II – 1843. In: Istorica. Lezioni sula Encilopedia e Metodologia dela storia. Trad.: I. Milano – Napoli: Emery.
_______. (1994) Istorica. Lezioni di enciclopédia e metodologia dela storia. Trad. Silvia Caianiello. Napoli: Guida.
In-formation and modern state
12
Feb
It is impossible to think about the modern state, without thinking about its laws and the social contract that is established from them, and it is not by chance that they arise after the Gutenberg press (and the book).
One can think in an equally naive way that this is just theory, it is easy to demonstrate 
that it is not the form of action of the polis, it is impossible to think without the Greek polis, and the thoughts ranging from the pre-Socratic to the modern contractualists : Thomas Hobbes, John Locke and the Swiss (he was not French) Jean Jacques Rousseau.
The in-formation of the modern state comes from the basic idea of these thinkers is that the relationship between rulers and governments must be established in the form of a contract, and that they argue in the background is that man is the wolf of man Thomas Hobbes, man is determined by the social relationship John Locke, this is born good and the environment shapes it, and man is a good savage that the environment has corrupted, Rousseau’s thought.
What some contemporary authors will say is that these forms, or these rules of social domination, have collapsed, whether due to the emancipation of the spectator as advocated by Jacques Rancière, or due to the failure of the rules of the human park as explored by Peter Sloterdijk, of course there are others possible interpretations, like the conservative in fashion, resume the solid state.
The Oscar of the Parasite
10
Feb
I was convinced that the Academy would give this year the Oscar to the Joker, although
it never admits for political reasons, it seems that some foundation (or several) lost has made us return to nationalist and authoritarian values that generally lead to autocracies and dictatorships .
Differentiating autocracy differs from dictatorship, when power (Kratos) is exercise by itself (self) means power by power, while dictatorship is the denial of democracy, and what emerged in the contemporary world is a mixture of the two people, in free elections .
The award-winning Joker is a good image, it is reasonable to give the Oscar for best actor, although the character is a pathological mixture of mean ingredients, with the nomination of 14 categories was already a sign of a certain “veneration” for the film, that not is to resulted.
I remember that The Wicked (1950) and Titanic, in addition to the recent La la Land had 14 nominations.
Two awards given, either by exclusively artistic criterion (forgetting ethics and politics), would be only an actor but also won more 2 categories.
I had decided not to comment, but the nomination of Dois Papas (by Brazilian Fernando Meirelles) and the controversial documentary Democracy in vertigo, about what I say here, went from the opposite hand of the Joker, Two Popes received the consolation prize for adapted script.
I leave my protest, no doubt 1917 (3 figurines) has great qualities, who watched Parasite (won 4) the film almost hypnotizes us and Once upon a time in Hollywood (3 figurines) deserved more, I am surprise for better actress Renée Zellweger.
Last as animation the statuette went to Toy Stories which I think is deserved.
Make the difference
07
Feb
Making a difference does not and therefore lose 
identity, only the idealistic concept of self-identity sees it that way, that is why we created a world of sameness in which everything is very similar, before being an element of culture it was an element of thought, the imperative Kantian categorical: “act in such a way as to be a model for others”.
Then the cultural industry, the mass media radio and television developed this, created standards of beauty, consumption and even morality, the morality of the state before being an individual morality, it is a “collective” morality of values and customs, that do not mean an ethics and a “solid” identity, this includes the love of homeland symbols and patrimonial values.
Making a difference does mean having an identity with an ethical and moral principle, which includes beliefs and even behavior (see previous post), but which allows dialogue and cultural customs different from ours, so that you can indicate to others a behavior and an action capable of including them and showing human and social dignity thus influencing culturally by showing the “difference” of true and eternal values that benefit the whole society.
True cultures and philosophies must encourage this, they must make a difference not in order to impose opinions and customs, but in a way that includes the Other, that is why it never accompanies the superior air, arrogance and the idea that what is different is wrong, this is Manichaeism and never love.
The Bible idea that the culture of Love should make a difference, that is to say “salt and yeast”, brings together the idea that to make a difference it takes little, but the salt and yeast cannot be spoiled because the effect on the food will not be noticed.
The true Christian culture establishes in Matthew (Mt 5:13): “You are the salt of the earth. Now, if the salt becomes tasteless, how will we salt it? It will serve no more than to be trampled on by men and to be thrown away. ”
Identity as self-assertion, as arrogance is nothing but tasteless salt
American primaries
05
Feb
After a technological shame, curious that this
happens in the USA and here the polls doubt, the first results come out with 62%, even more curious is the counting system because although Bernie Sanders leads.
In fact a candidate to the left, the results even yesterday night were: Pete Buttigieg leads with 26.9% of state delegates to nominate the candidate, while Sanders is behind in 25.1% of the figures, followed by Senator Elizabeth Warren with 18.3%, Joe Biden with 15.6% and Amy Klobuchar with 12.6%, one of them will dispute with Trump who won there.
One can speculate on the real reasons for the delay, suspicions aside, the growth of Bernie Sanders could mean a future polarization in the elections, a radical right against a left (in the American mold) also radical, is almost a global trend.
The important thing is to understand why this occurs, and of course it spreads throughout society, first the difficulty in extreme situations of thinking about political situations when the speeches went to extremes and second because the imposition of a radicalized president arouses a reaction. It is possible to resume serenity and reflect again on the urgent and dramatic world problems, from ecology to income distribution, it would be healthy for democracy, for citizens and for culture as we reflected yesterday on the Oscar nominees who have the finger of two Brazilian directors, but the American and world scenario is worrying.
Aesthetics, culture and spirituality
31
Jan
The disorder that contemporary society advances
is not only economic, social and cultural, the aesthetic reflex is a society that aims to eliminate imperfect, pain and co-immunity (all types of immunity are sought at all costs, removing diversity nature), is the attempt of the absence of tragedy, in the cultural and aesthetic sense, of change, but life goes through death.
The result, contrary to the aesthetic that admits the tragedy, is precisely to move towards what it tries to eliminate, it is the society of death, of obscurity, while perfection is sought, the aesthetics of the perfect and straight, but they are contrary to nature, and the man who is part of it. The expansion of the corona virus, other viruses came as recently as the Asian flu, it is a show that we must live with this, recent discoveries in the glaciers of viruses that we did not know mean that they always existed and always had mutations.
But the transgenic mutations, of plants and animals that do not have any type of disease, have the paradox of being precisely that they generate potent diseases while destroying the natural diversity of the complex natural system, in fact, this is also the simplification.
At the social and religious level it means abolishing divergence, moving towards an identity that is nothing other than the denial of the Other, the diverse and the imposition of authoritarian systems, while at the same time making a discourse against individualism and authoritarianism, it favors its, see the Entropy law (picture).
The contradictory, as well as the different walks and continues to evolve in the midst of crises, because it knows that tragedy is part of life and can be overcome if viewed with concern and with the naturalness of those who lead life and society into the future.
The biblical passage in which he speaks of Jesus’ natural life, his preaching time was 3 years, and for 30 he lived a normal life, see the 10 to 1 ratio, the Pharisees and fundamentalists of our time live the opposite, is narrated by the evangelist Lucas (Lk 2,39-40):
“After fulfilling everything, according to the Law of the Lord, they returned to Galilee, to Nazaré, their city. The boy grew and became strong, full of wisdom; and the grace of God was with him ”. In fact, the law in this case was the laws of Judaism, that is, its relationship with the tradition of his time.
What place does aesthetics occupy in our time
29
Jan
I imagined that it would be difficult, even
impossible, to approach the subject, since it is concerned with art critics of various types, Freudian psychoanalysts and very rarely anyone with our aesthetic, in the sense of beautiful Greek, or the contemplation of which Byung Chull speaks Han.
I found in a small text by Jacques Rancière, I am increasingly meeting this author, who came to know his work almost by chance (The emancipation of the spectator), referring to the theme as the aesthetic unconscious, but he himself explains it at the outset. psychological aspect of the theme.
I find right at the beginning of the book: “aesthetics does not deal with science or the discipline that deals with art.
Aesthetics designates a way of thinking that deals with the things of art ” (Rancière, 2009, p. 11) and this would be enough, but it complements their thinking and that they seek:“ to say what they consist of as things of thought. ” ( Rancière, 2009, p. 12).
It is a finding, but it could not be otherwise in a dialogue with the Kantian “tradition”, the following complement follows, saying that art as a thought is a recent reference and refers to the work Genealogy of art by Baumgarten of 1790 as the criticism of the Faculty of Judging of Kant.
From Baumgarten, a simple reference in his work would suffice, referring to the union of objects that “must be thought in a beautiful way with causes and effects, as this union must be sensitively known through the analogue of Reason” (Baumgarten, 1933 , p. 127) and so both he and Kant will establish “confused thinking” about the definition of aesthetics.
Rancière will say that both when calling Kant’s confused or heterogeneous sensitive thought, both will make art “no more than a minor knowledge, but a knowledge of what is not thought” (Rancière, 2009, p. 13) and the note of author will link it to enlightenment and liberalism.
There is no explicit reference to Nietzsche’s thought about art, but when discussing Oedipus, the most typical Greek tragedy and Nietzsche defends its role in art, he says about the Freudian use of this tragedy as “universal”, which at the same time encompasses three aspects: “a general tendency of the human psyche, a determined fictional material and a dramatic scheme considered exemplary.” (Rancière, 2009, p. 15).
Of course, this is only introductory, what Ranciére wants to explain is that it is not a matter of subjective or “confused knowledge”, but “a paradoxical union of disease and medicine that is, a paradoxical union of the two” (p. 26) in a reference to “The birth of tragedy” of the Nietzsche, what idealism as thought and romanticism as “aesthetics” want to deny.
Rancière, J. (2009) O inconsciente estético. trad. Monica Costa Netto. São Paulo: ed. 34.
Does tradition and innovation have any relationship?
28
Jan
In the cultural sphere, it is often imagined that it does not, or establishes innovation only in the strict scope of culture, while it is related to beliefs, values, and mainly to the forms of social relations that involve the
production of wealth, the use of techniques , for example, the transition from oral culture to writing, meant a profound change.
Innovation is linked to some significant cultural change, in general, with the influence of new techniques and production methods for consumption, but the term is broader.
The change today is from the media to the transmedia, that is, the media complement each other, you can make a video from a text or an oral exhibition of a certain culture, so you can talk about the narrative of transmidia, or “ storytelling ”, that is, telling stories.
The term was first used by Professor Marsha Kinder, from the University of Sourthern California (USA), in 1991, but in 2003 Professor Henry Jenkins created a definition that was enshrined in his book “Culture of Convergence”, where he defined it as: “[…] a new aesthetic that emerged in response to the convergence of the media”.
When referring to the term aesthetics, it goes beyond the pure production of consumer products to reach art, culture and, in a way, the belief system as a whole, even though rejection in several areas is common, the process of “innovation ”Advances.
There is also a redefinitionof storytelling, the tradition of oral culture of storytelling, where the tradition is perpetuated changes to a new form, now it becomes the use of audiovisual resources to transmit a story, which can be told in an improvised way (as in oral tradition), but can also be worked on and enriched with visual aids.
JENKINS, Henry. (2006) Convergence Culture: Where Old and New Media Collide. NY: New York UniversityPress.
