Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior / Esta dissertação procura, utilizando o pensamento de Maquiavel, Montesquieu e Madison, estudar o governo republicano a partir de dois paradigmas distintos, a saber, a forma de governo e o modo de governar. O primeiro diz respeito ao seu caráter institucional do Estado e da atividade política e se torna inteligível por uma compreensão teórica da política, ou seja, sobre o que lhe confere formato. O segundo se refere aos modos de ação do governo independentemente de seu formato institucional e pode ser compreendido por aspectos sociológicos, pois diz respeito mais à sociedade. Maquiavel e, de um ponto de vista, Montesquieu podem ser considerados os principais representantes da tradição que identifica na forma de governo a definição da república. Montesquieu, sob outra perspectiva, e Madison são os que mais se dedicaram ao modo de governar. Além disso, este estudo procura abordar a liberdade como categoria identitária da política e, assim, formando um todo coeso da tradição republicana. / This dissertation tries, using the thought of Machiavelli, Montesquieu and Madison, to study the republican government based on two distinct paradigms, namely the form of government and the mode of governing. The first relates to its institutional character of the State and political activity and becomes intelligible by a theoretical understanding of politics, that is what gives it shape. The second refers to modes of action of the government regardless of its institutional format and can be understood by sociological aspects, as it relates to society. Machiavelli and, under a point of view, Montesquieu can be considered the main representatives of that tradition identifies as the definition of form of government of the republic. Montesquieu, from another perspective, and Madison are the most dedicated to how to govern. Furthermore, this study seeks to address the freedom as a category of identity politics and thereby forming a cohesive whole of the republican tradition.

Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior / Esta dissertação procura, utilizando o pensamento de Maquiavel, Montesquieu e Madison, estudar o governo republicano a partir de dois paradigmas distintos, a saber, a forma de governo e o modo de governar. O primeiro diz respeito ao seu caráter institucional do Estado e da atividade política e se torna inteligível por uma compreensão teórica da política, ou seja, sobre o que lhe confere formato. O segundo se refere aos modos de ação do governo independentemente de seu formato institucional e pode ser compreendido por aspectos sociológicos, pois diz respeito mais à sociedade. Maquiavel e, de um ponto de vista, Montesquieu podem ser considerados os principais representantes da tradição que identifica na forma de governo a definição da república. Montesquieu, sob outra perspectiva, e Madison são os que mais se dedicaram ao modo de governar. Além disso, este estudo procura abordar a liberdade como categoria identitária da política e, assim, formando um todo coeso da tradição republicana. / This dissertation tries, using the thought of Machiavelli, Montesquieu and Madison, to study the republican government based on two distinct paradigms, namely the form of government and the mode of governing. The first relates to its institutional character of the State and political activity and becomes intelligible by a theoretical understanding of politics, that is what gives it shape. The second refers to modes of action of the government regardless of its institutional format and can be understood by sociological aspects, as it relates to society. Machiavelli and, under a point of view, Montesquieu can be considered the main representatives of that tradition identifies as the definition of form of government of the republic. Montesquieu, from another perspective, and Madison are the most dedicated to how to govern. Furthermore, this study seeks to address the freedom as a category of identity politics and thereby forming a cohesive whole of the republican tradition.

Submitted by Renata Lopes (renatasil82@gmail.com) on 2016-10-17T11:26:37Z No. of bitstreams: 1 luisgustavomandaranocruzesilva.pdf: 825435 bytes, checksum: f31174582329c2ca51d715f2df5cbe98 (MD5) / Approved for entry into archive by Adriana Oliveira (adriana.oliveira@ufjf.edu.br) on 2016-10-22T13:10:24Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 luisgustavomandaranocruzesilva.pdf: 825435 bytes, checksum: f31174582329c2ca51d715f2df5cbe98 (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2016-10-22T13:10:24Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 luisgustavomandaranocruzesilva.pdf: 825435 bytes, checksum: f31174582329c2ca51d715f2df5cbe98 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2008-10-26 / As idéias de Maquiavel fizeram tremer a Europa do século XVI, levando políticos, religiosos e intelectuais a intermináveis discussões e causando um estrondo ensurdecedor, cujos ecos podem ser ouvidos ainda em nossos dias. A Igreja Romana do fim do século XV e início do XVI se afundava em corrupção e jogos de poder e interesse. Maquiavel, no Capítulo Doze de seus Comentários sobre a Primeira Década de Tito Lívio – publicado pela primeira vez em 1519 – previa que algo grande estava para acontecer, algo que abalaria o “eterno” Trono de São Pedro. O cisma protagonizado por Lutero ocorreria exatamente neste ano. Meu trabalho busca demonstrar a complexidade da relação entre a Igreja Católica – e os governos por ela sustentados – e os escritos políticos de Nicolau Maquiavel. Sendo assim, a Península Ibérica, braço forte do catolicismo do XVI e XVII se mostrou o local apropriado a ser abarcado por meus estudos. Estudando-se a recepção das idéias de Maquiavel na Ibéria do XVI, emerge a figura do bispo português Jerônimo Osório, o primeiro a criticar textualmente as idéias do secretário de Florença. Maquiavel, a recepção de suas idéias na Península de Camões e Cervantes, e a importância do pensamento do bispo português Jerônimo Osório são os pontos centrais desta dissertação. / Machiavelli’s ideas made sixteenth century Europe quake, generating endless acrimonious debate and so causing a deafening roar whose echoes can still be heard today. The Roman Church at the end of the fifteenth and beginning of the sixteenth centuries was foundering in corruption and intrigues of power and self-interest. Machiavelli, in chapter twelve of his Discourses on Livy (Discorsi sopra la prima deca di Tito Livio), first published in 1519, predicted that something big was about to happen, something that could shake the Throne of Saint Peter to its foundations. Indeed, the Lutheran schism began that year. This thesis seeks to demonstrate the complex relationship between the Catholic Church – and its subject states – and Machiavelli’s political writings. The Iberia, a staunch stronghold of Catholicism in these times, thus seems to be an appropriate focus for this study. Research into the Iberian response to Machiavelli’s ideas reveals that the Portuguese bishop Jeronymo Osorio was the first to criticize, in writing, the ideas of the former. Machiavelli, the response of his ideas in the land of Camões and Cervantes, and the importance of Jeronymo Osorio’s thought are the central themes of this dissertation.

O presente trabalho tem por intuito, por meio de uma perspectiva interdisciplinar, analisar de que maneira, no início da Era Moderna, podemos encontrar uma dimensão trágica na relação entre poder e justiça nas obras de dois autores fundamentais para a história do pensamento político e da arte: Maquiavel e Shakespeare. Por meio de uma leitura cruzada dos dois autores, defende a hipótese de que existem semelhanças desconcertantes entre eles e, ao mesmo tempo, diferenças importantes que imprimem maneiras diametralmente opostas de conceber a relação entre poder e justiça. O trabalho sustenta que Maquiavel pode ser lido como um autor trágico, principalmente devido a uma interpretação analítica do Príncipe, e que, para este autor, poder e justiça estão inevitavelmente separados. Ao mesmo tempo, argumenta que, para Shakespeare, nas chamadas grandes tragédias Hamlet, Otelo, Rei Lear e Macbeth , poder e justiça estão indissociavelmente unidos e que é justamente esta ligação que possibilita a legitimidade política. A partir de uma investigação do sentido do trágico, procura, ao desenvolver as dimensões jurídicas, políticas e artísticas envolvidas nesta forma de expressão, mostrar filosoficamente os contornos de uma teoria da justiça e do poder na modernidade e visualizar as condições de possibilidade de uma compreensão desta problemática em nosso próprio tempo. / The research has the purpose of, by means of multidisciplinary approach, analyzing how, in the beginning of Modern Age, we can find a tragic dimension between power and justice in the two main authors work of arts to History of Law and Political Thinking and art: Machiavelli and Shakespeare. By means of cross-referencing these two authors, the assumption that there are confusing similarities between them is defended and, in the same way, important differences that demonstrate diametrically opposing views of conceiving the relationship between power and justice. In this paper, it is defended that Machiavelli can be considered as a tragic author, mainly, because of The Princes analytical interpretation, and that, for this author, power and justice are inevitably separated. Simultaneously, it is argued that, for Shakespeare, in the big tragedies Hamlet, Otelo, King Lear and Macbeth , Power and justice are inseparably united, and this union makes possible the political legitimacy. From an investigation in the tragic sense, the search, when developing legal, political and artistic dimensions involved in this way, showing philosophically the power and justice theory characteristics in the modernity and to observe the conditions of possibility of understanding this problematic in our own time.

Doctorat en philosophie et lettres / info:eu-repo/semantics/nonPublished

In the following thesis, I argue that to contextualize Machiavelli’s republican thought in his Italian humanist heritage permits us to understand how Machiavelli reaches back not only to an Italian pre-humanist inheritance of liberty as freedom from servitude, but to a Stoic conception of agency which he inherits and shapes in that concept of liberty. While my analysis of Machiavelli and his humanist heritage is in fundamental agreement with that of Quentin Skinner in The Foundations of Modern Political Thought, it develops however the implications of two theses that Paul O. Kristeller outlines in his works on Italian humanism: the eclectic nature of humanist ideas and their rhetorical focus. From this I draw a slightly different picture of the humanist heritage and its polemics with Augustine, and from these an understanding about Stoic agency and how it is inherited and shaped in Machiavelli’s conception of the citizen and civic duties.

No description available.

The present dissertation deals with the relationship between democracy and agonism. It attempts to defend the idea that certain problematic aspects of contemporary liberal democracies are not due to their origin primarily in the change of social conditions (the massification of democracy, the growth of complexity in modern societies), that made the original democratic promises unrealizable, but in certain oblivion of the agon. The agon is understood as a constitutive feature of democratic society and its oblivion is seen not to be accidental. To defend this proposition I focuse on an interpretation of the dialogue between populist republicanism (Machiavelli) and elitist republicanism (Guicciardini). This dialogue is usually understood as one of the sources of modern democratic tradition. I try to explain that in Machiavelli's political theory two notions of agonism are present - pragmatic agon that sees conflict as a basis of social cohesion and strategic agon that is described as a ferocious egalitarianism employed by the second class citizens in order to gain equality from the first class citizens. These two forms of agonism are explained to form the axis of Machiavelli's notion of the political and also of a free republic and democracy. Guicciardini's elitist republicanism is shown to stand in opposition...

The association of the name of Francis Bacon with that of Niccolo Machiavelli is no novelty to the modern reader. But in most instances this association is brief and fleeting, possessed of a will-o'-the-wisp character that is at once unsatisfying and challenging. The natural conclusion to which one is tempted to leap is that Bacon, since he is the more recent in point of time, was influenced by the great Florentine in matters of philosophy and style. A second possibility is that both men were influenced by similar conditions of political and cultural backgrounds. A still further consideration lies in the belief that certain ideas are "in the air", so to speak, and descend upon different minds in various times and places without implying any necessity of relationship. It seems advisable to study the two men and their works in the light of these three possibilities. It is not the purpose of this thesis to assert the influence of Machiavelli upon Bacon's philosophy as a whole. This study is rather an attempt to bring together in comparative consideration the personalities and philosophies of two outstanding minds of their respective ages, and to draw such conclusions as seem logical. To this end I propose to examine the theories of Machiavelli set forth in The Prince and the Discourses on Livy, and from this background to view Bacon's philosophy relating to civil business as set forth in his Essays, especially "Of Truth," and "Of Great Place," and in the Advancement of Learning. I have here used the term, philosophy, to refer to the principles of human conduct by which Bacon's life was governed, rather than in a metaphysical sense.

[pt] Democracia formas de governo em Espinosa e Maquiavel: outra perspectiva sobre a Modernidade analisa os meios através dos quais a tradição espinosano-maquiaveliana, uma alternativa a outras vertentes teóricas da Modernidade, compreende os fundamentos jurídico-constitucionais que sustentam as formas de governo e, particularmente, a democracia, bem como suas estratégias de conservação. Pretende-se responder ao seguinte questionamento: em que medida esta tradição oferece alternativas para a compreensão dos alicerces das formas de governo e, em particular, da democracia, de modo permitir o entendimento dos meios necessários à conservação daqueles princípios constitucionais que sustentam o Estado de Direito? Acredita-se, como hipótese, que a duração de uma forma de governo instituída exige a incorporação da dinâmica conflitiva dos afetos às estruturas que promovem a gestão dos assuntos comuns do Estado, o que permitiria a canalização da potência constituinte e, consequentemente, ofereceria meios para o aperfeiçoamento da própria forma de governo. Este estudo alinha-se à vertente das pesquisas de caráter eminentemente compreensivo, uma vez que se volta a um exame qualitativo dos conceitos traçados a partir da teoria crítica da fortuna. Ante a variação das circunstâncias, a conservação da dinâmica afetiva de um governo democrático requer um retorno aos princípios para promover a reintrodução do desejo de liberdade, uma vez que a república deve estar aberta à participação e livre de meios que concentrem as decisões a gestão dos assuntos comuns do Estado, mantendo-as sempre abertas as discussões, bem como os próprios canais de decisão à população. / [en] Democracy and forms government by Spinoza and Machiavelli: another perspective of the Modern Era analyzes the means by which the Spinoza- Machiavelli tradition presents itself as an alternative to the mainstream constitutional thought developed after their works. The understanding of the constitutional foundations that support not only democracy, but the other forms of government as well intends to demonstrate its conservation strategies by answering the following question: to what extent does this tradition offer alternatives to improve the understanding of the forms of government and, in particular, of democracy? In order to allow an understanding of the means necessary for the conservation of those constitutional principles that maintain the rule of law, it is believed that every government needs to incorporate the conflictive dynamic of the affects to its structures and, therefore, promote a plural management of the political affairs. This is the basis which would offer means for the improvement of the form of government itself. Methodologically, this study develops a qualitative examination of the concepts drawn from the critical theory of fortune in order to comprehend the varying circumstances that allow the preservation of that democratic dynamics that governments require. In this matter, a return to those principles experienced by past democratic experiments should clarify the means to the reintroduction of the desire for freedom. Throughout the opening to the participation that involves the absence of means that concentrate decisions in the just a few people, every form of government keeps power in its population hands.