No description available.

No description available.

[pt] Esta tese dedica-se à reflexão teórica em torno do problema do indivíduo na modernidade desde a perspectiva da conjunção entre política e filosofia. Em particular, toma-se como ponto de partida o diagnóstico apresentado pela teoria do individualismo possessivo, de C. B. Macpherson, especialmente quando explicita que as sociedades políticas modernas se estruturaram a partir de uma concepção de indivíduo marcada por características possessivas. A tese objetiva demonstrar como historicamente esteve posta uma disputa teórico-política em torno dessa noção. Assim, na primeira parte, propõe-se que a leitura de Étienne Balibar em relação à filosofia de John Locke, a qual se constitui como uma das bases da teoria do individualismo possessivo, apresenta uma renovação crítica de tal teoria, pois explicita que a conjunção entre indivíduo e propriedade não se limita à teoria política e à teoria da propriedade, mas está inscrita na teoria metafísica, estruturando a própria concepção de consciência individual. Já na segunda parte da tese é analisado em que sentido as teorias contemporâneas sobre o transindividual – hipótese primeiramente formulada por Gilbert Simondon – representam uma contraposição atual a essa perspectiva sobre a individualidade, que, ao mesmo tempo, diferencia-se das críticas tradicionais do individualismo. Essa problemática também é analisada através da leitura de Balibar, a qual oferece às teorias do transindividual um necessário complemento político que não estava inteiramente presente nas versões mais estritamente ontológicas. Além disso, ao partir da filosofia de Spinoza, a interpretação balibardiana permite identificar a formulação de uma concepção alternativa sobre a individualidade contemporânea a Locke. Propõe-se que tal concepção não se baseia em características possessivas e institui um horizonte para a imaginação política frente aos desafios políticos contemporâneos. / [en] This dissertation focuses on the theoretical debate around the problem of the individual in modernity from the perspective of the conjunction between politics and philosophy. It departs from the diagnosis presented by C. B. Macpherson s theory of possessive individualism, especially when it states that modern political societies have been structured by a conception of the individual characterized by possessive qualities. The dissertation aims to demonstrate how historically a theoretical-political struggle around this notion has taken place. Thus, in the first part, it is proposed that Étienne Balibar s reading of John Locke s philosophy, which is one of the foundations of the theory of possessive individualism, presents a critical renewal of such theory, since it clarifies that the conjunction between individual and property is not limited to political theory and property theory, but is embedded in metaphysical theory, structuring the very conception of individual consciousness. The second part of the thesis analyzes how contemporary theories of the transindividual - hypothesis first formulated by Gilbert Simondon - represent a contemporary counterpoint to this perspective on individuality, which, at the same time, differs from traditional critiques of individualism. This problematic is also analyzed through Balibar s reading, which offers to the theories of the transindividual a necessary political supplement that was not entirely present in the more strictly ontological versions. Moreover, by starting from Spinoza s philosophy, the Balibardian interpretation allows the identification of the formulation of an alternative conception on individuality contemporary to Locke. It is proposed that such conception is not based on possessive characteristics and establishes a horizon for the political imagination in light of contemporary political challenges.

Made available in DSpace on 2016-04-26T20:23:00Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Joao Roberto Gorini Gamba.pdf: 1007112 bytes, checksum: edb9d57c6304caaf523b14a48859de66 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2014-08-06 / The present work is dedicated to the study of the property throughout a historical reconstruction of the institute according to the treatment given to it in legal, economic and social aspects, seeking to identify their philosophical foundations as well as the consequences verified by each adopted model. Initially, we looked for to expose conjectures about the origin of property in a primitive human stage and, in the following moment, pointing out the various transformations undergone by the institute since its apprehension by Roman Law until its receipt by the Napoleonic Code which, as the reading done, consolidates the property as the center of the modern legal system / O presente trabalho se dedica ao estudo da propriedade por meio de uma reconstrução histórica do instituto conforme o tratamento dado a ele nos âmbitos jurídico, econômico e social, buscando apontar seus fundamentos filosóficos, bem como as consequências verificadas por cada modelo adotado. Inicialmente, buscamos expor conjecturas sobre a origem da propriedade num estágio humano primitivo e, na sequência, apontar as diversas transformações sofridas pelo instituto desde sua apreensão pelo Direito Romano até sua recepção pelo Código Napoleônico que, conforme a leitura realizada, consolida a propriedade como centro do ordenamento jurídico moderno

This thesis traces versions of the theory of individualism by three major theorists, John Locke, John Stuart Mill and John Dewey, as they criticize existing social, cultural, economic, legal and military conditions of their times. I argue that each theorist modifies the theory of individualism to best suit their understanding of human nature, adapting it where they can and outright removing aspects where they cannot. Based upon each thinker's conception of human nature, their corresponding theory of individualism does justice to that nature. With their view of individualism, each thinker criticizes the activities of their day for its lack of justice to human nature for the bulk of humanity. I examine each thinker's concrete conditions, their theory of human nature, theory of justice and their corresponding theory of individualism. In the first three chapters, I examine first Locke's, then Mill's then Dewey's theory of human nature, justice and individualism. In my final chapter, I critically examine each thinker's theory of individualism and find that John Dewey's is most adequate for our current social conditions. Locke's individualism was a criticism of the absolute rule of aristocratic Land-owners and was an attempt to undermine the conceptual basis for their continued power. John Stuart Mill's individualism was a criticism of John Locke's individualism insofar as majoritarianism had taken root in England and resulted in the "Tyranny of the Majority." Therefore Mill gave high value to the sanctity of the individual even in disagreement with the overwhelming majority. Dewey's theory of individualism largely was a criticism of widespread poverty and abuse of political power in America during the Great Depression. laissez faire economics, combined with cut-throat competitiveness and atomistic individualism had resulted in pervasive injustice and Dewey recommended recognition of our inter-connectedness and continuity rather than our separateness. While I believe Dewey's theory of individualism to be most fit for our current social setting, even his theory suffers from problems yet to be worked out. I lay out these problems in the final chapter and conclude with remarks on what needs yet to be done.

In his defense of negative freedom, Isaiah Berlin&rsquo / s main target is the political voluntarism of enlightenment rationalism which has paved way to totalitarian and authoritarian political regimes of the 20th century which brought the sacrifice of individual freedom. For Berlin, in contrast to Platonic realism of enlightenment rationalism in which there is a substantial belief in reason&rsquo / s capacity for giving us the knowledge of the supreme good, the nominalist foundations of negative freedom can provide us a secure grounding in the justification of the rights over the goods. By declaring the inviolable rights and relying on the principle of neutrality, negative freedom eliminates the risk of political voluntarism stemming from enlightenment rationalism or scientism. Since the 1980s, in Turkey, political and social oppositions to Rousseauian enlightenment of the Turkish state have deployed the epistemic and political tools of negative freedom. This appeal has aimed to open a legitimate space for the language of freedom as non-intervention under which each individual chooses his personal values without the fear of state intervention. In contrast to the interventionist claims of state, negative freedom, it has been believed that, has provided a secure grounding for the rights of individuals. Besides, the meta-ethical thesis of the incommensurability of human goods has also been employed for delegitimizing the substantial belief in the monism of the republican regime which relied on the assumption presenting the republican way of life as the supreme good. This missionary zeal for the re-construction of the republic on the premises of negative freedom has not, however, gone unchallenged. Against such identification of democracy with free-market and value pluralism, the republican front defends the restoration of the foundational ideals of the republic by returning to the substantial understanding of national sovereignty under the formulation of &lsquo / militant democracy&rsquo / . In this study, even though I agree with the nominalist epistemology of negative freedom which manifests a skeptic and agnostic attitude toward the power of reason and the insistence of negative freedom on the necessity of the priority of right, I have demonstrated the reasons behind the failure of negative freedom in justifying the priority of the right over the goods. Actually, my analysis has already displayed that concerning the radical consequences of the thesis of incommensurability, it is doubtful whether negative freedom can provide political conditions even for the cause of peace without the presence of absolute sovereign as suggested in Hobbes&rsquo / s political theory. At this point, I have argued that we should take into consideration the achievements of the ideal of autonomy in grounding the priority of the right over the good. Contrary to Berlin&rsquo / s distorted representation of autonomy, I believe that the critical rationalism of autonomy and its understanding of law will protect us not only from the metaphysics of enlightenment rationalism and scientism, but also from the metaphysics of historicism envisaged by Berlin&rsquo / s version of negative freedom.

Syftet med denna uppsats är att undersöka om det går att rättfärdiga militära interventioner med stöd i klassisk liberal politisk teori. För ändamålet har de klassiskt liberala filosoferna John Locke och John Stuart Mill analyserats. Undersökningen är utförd medelst en text- och idéanalys av några av filosofernas portalverk. Resultatet av studien visar ett tydligt stöd för vissa sorters militära interventioner och att det faktumet är djupt rotat i flera etiska och moraliska överväganden som Locke respektive Mill gör. Slutsatsen i uppsatsen är därav att det finns klassiskt liberala argument för att genomföra militära interventioner.

No description available.

"Mémoire présenté à la Faculté des études supérieures en vue de l'obtention du grade de Maître en droit (LL.M)" / Prises à la lettre et strictement appliquées par les intégristes musulmans, certaines dispositions du Coran vont à l'encontre de l'égalité entre hommes et femmes. Pour sa part, Mahmoud Mohamed Taha s'est plutôt attaché à promouvoir cette égalité non pas malgré le Coran mais en raison même d'une compréhension renouvelée du Coran. Après avoir esquissé le contexte global des relations entre islam, modernité, et droits de la personne, ce mémoire évoque les grandes lignes du modernisme musulman dans le secteur du droit pour faire ressortir le caractère original et audacieux de l'approche réformiste proposée par Taha. Cette approche sera d'abord étudiée de façon globale dans ses principes de base et ensuite dans son application au cas spécifique de l'égalité entre hommes et femmes. Puis, un parallèle entre la pensée de John Locke et celle de Taha soulignera leur enracinement commun dans le jus naturale et servira de fil conducteur pour dégager, en conclusion, la portée actuelle de l'oeuvre de Taha. / When taken literally and strictly applied by Muslim fundamentalists, sorne Koranic provisions go against gender equality. As for him, Mahmoud Mohamed Taha has endeavoured to promote that equality not in spite of the Koran but rather precisely because of a renewed understanding of it. After outlining the global context of the relations between Islam, modemity, and human rights, this dissertation evokes the main features of Islamic modemism in the field of law in order to bring out the original and bold nature of Taha's reformist approach. This approach is first studied globally in its basic principles and then in its application to the case of gender equality. After that, a parallel between John Locke's and Taha's thought shall underline their common roots withinjus naturale and lead to a conclusion assessing the actual impact of Taha's work.

Da John Locke wiederholt betont, dass seine Theorie von materiellen Körpern, vorgebracht im Essay concerning Human Understanding (1690), eine genuin philosophische Darstellung von Körpern sei, summiert sich das Thema seiner Ausführungen zu einer philosophischen Reflektion der sogenannten wissenschaftlichen Revolution im siebzehnten Jahrhundert auf. In dieser Arbeit werde ich eine Interpretationslinie entwickeln, welche zu bestimmen versucht, worin das genuin philosophische Anliegen von Lockes Analyse von Körpern besteht. Sie führt zu einer umfassenden Neubetrachtung von Lockes Ausführungen, da Unterschiede zu anderen Interpretationen gerade bei den zentralen Fragestellungen und der ihnen entsprechenden Begriffen bestehen, namentlich von: dem Substratum von Körpern, primären und sekundären Qualitäten, Ähnlichkeit, der Rolle der Korpuskulartheorie, Archetypen, realen und nominalen Essenzen, dem Argument zu Spezien und Klassifikation, die Bedeutung von Lockes Sprachanalyse, dem Wissensbegriff, dem Ideal wissenschaftlichem Verstehens und der Bestimmung der Reichweite zeitgenössischen Wissens. Es wird argumentiert, dass er bewusst zeitgenössisches Wissen von Körpern in der Perspektive eines idealen, wissenschaftlichen Verstehens von ihnen bestimmt und dass er so einen philosophischen Rahmen für die Naturwissenschaften entwirft, der: (1) spezifiziert, worin eine Wissenschaft von Körpern idealerweise besteht, (2) zeitgenössisches Wissen in dieser Perspektive bestimmt, (3) eine eigene Konzeption für eine zeitgenössische Wissenschaft beinhaltet, welche Mittel zur Verfügung stellt, dieses Wissen zu erweitern und (4) alternative Ideen von einer Wissenschaft von Körpern zurückweist. / Since John Locke repeatedly insists that his theory of bodies, endorsed in the Essay concerning Human Understanding (1690), is a genuinely philosophical assessment of bodies, the topic of his account adds up to a philosophical reflection on the so-called scientific revolution in the seventeenth century. In this work, I will develop a line of interpretation that undertakes to settle the issue what the genuinely philosophical issue of Locke's analysis of bodies consists in. This leads to a thorough re-examination of Locke's account, since the differences to other interpretations concern most prominent issues on bodies and, correspondingly, many of their crucial concepts: the substratum of bodies, primary and secondary qualities, resemblance, the role of corpuscularian theory, archetypes, real and nominal essences, the argument on species and classification, the significance of the analysis of language, the concept of knowledge, the ideal of scientific understanding, and the account of the scope of contemporary knowledge. As will be argued, Locke consciously assesses contemporary knowledge in the perspective of an ideal scientific grasp of bodies and thus unfolds a philosophical framework for natural science which: (1) specifies what a science of bodies ideally consists in, (2) assesses contemporary knowledge in this perspective, (3) advances an own conception of a contemporary science of bodies that proposes means to enhance contemporary knowledge, and (4) refutes alternative ideas of a science of bodies.