No description available.

Die Dissertation leistet drei Beiträge zur Forschung: (1) Sie entwickelt ein neuartiges vierstufiges Modell wissenschaftlicher Theorien. Dieses Modell kombiniert logisch-empiristische Ansätze (Carnap, Popper, Frege) mit Konzepten von Metaphern & Narrativen (Wittgenstein, Burke, Morgan), erlaubt so deutlich präzisiere Beschreibungen wissenschaftlicher Theorien bereit und löst/mildert Widersprüche in logisch-empiristischen Modellen. (Realismus vs. Empirismus, analytische vs. synthetische Aussagen, Unterdeterminiertheit/ Holismus, wissenschaftliche Erklärungen, Demarkation) (2) Mit diesem Modell gelingt ein Reihenvergleich sechs biologischer Theorien von Lamarck (1809), über Cuvier (1811), Geoffroy St. Hilaire (1835), Chambers (1844-60), Owen (1848-68), Wallace (1855/8) zu Darwin (1859-1872). Dieser Vergleich offenbart eine interessante Asymmetrie: Vergleicht man Darwin mit je einem Vorgänger, so bestehen zahlreiche wichtige Unterschiede. Vergleicht man ihn mit fünf Vorgängern, verschwinden diese fast völlig: Darwins originärer Beitrag zur Revolution in der Biologie des 19.Jh ist klein und seine Antwort nur eine aus einer kontinuierlichen Serie auf die empirischen Herausforderungen durch Paläontologie & Biogeographie seit Ende des 18. Jh. (3) Eine gestufte Rezeptionsanalyse zeigt, warum wir dennoch von einer Darwinschen Revolution sprechen. Zuerst zeigt eine quantitative Analyse der fast 2.000 biologischen Artikel in Britannien zwischen 1858 und 1876, dass Darwinsche Konzepte zwar wichtige Neuerungen brachten, jedoch nicht singulär herausragen. Verlässt man die Biologie und schaut sich die Rezeption bei anderen Wissenschaftlern und gebildeten Laien an, wechselt das Bild: Je weiter man aus der Biologie heraustritt, desto weniger Ebenen biologischen Wissens kennen die Rezipienten und desto sichtbarer wird Darwins Beitrag. Schließlich findet sich sein Beitrag in den abstraktesten Ebenen des biologischen Wissens: in Narrativ und Weltbild – den Ebenen die Laien rezipieren. / The dissertation makes three contributions to research: (1) It develops a novel 4-level-model of scientific theories which combines logical-empirical ideas (Carnap, Popper, Frege) with concepts of metaphors & narratives (Wittgenstein, Burke, Morgan), providing a new powerful toolbox for the analysis & comparison of scientific theories and overcoming/softening contradictions in logical-empirical models. (realism vs. empiricism, analytic vs. synthetic statements, holism, theory-laden observations, scientific explanations, demarcation) (2) Based on this model, the dissertation compares six biological theories from Lamarck (1809), via Cuvier (1811), Geoffroy St. Hilaire (1835), Chambers (1844-60), Owen (1848-68), Wallace (1855/8) to Darwin (1859-1872) and reveals an interesting asymmetry: Compared to any one of his predecessors, Darwins theory appears very original, however, compared to all five predecessor theories, many of these differences disappear and it remains but a small original contribution by Darwin. Thus, Darwin’s is but one in a continuous series of responses to the challenges posed to biology by paleontology and biogeography since the end of the 18th century. (3) A 3-level reception analysis, finally, demonstrates why we speak of a Darwinian revolution nevertheless. (i) A quantitative analysis of nearly 2.000 biological articles reveals that Darwinian concepts where indeed an important theoretical innovation – but definitely not the most important of the time. (ii) When leaving the circle of biology and moving to scientists from other disciplines or educated laymen, the landscape changes. The further outside the biological community, the shallower the audience’s knowledge – and the more visible Darwin’s original contribution. After all, most of Darwin’s contribution can be found in the narrative and worldview of 19th century biology: the only level of knowledge which laymen receive.

Submitted by Renata Lopes (renatasil82@gmail.com) on 2016-06-17T14:19:05Z No. of bitstreams: 1 marialuizaviannapessoademendonca.pdf: 4089662 bytes, checksum: c52edde5b2edf7a0dc3516fd910107e8 (MD5) / Approved for entry into archive by Adriana Oliveira (adriana.oliveira@ufjf.edu.br) on 2016-07-13T14:38:59Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 marialuizaviannapessoademendonca.pdf: 4089662 bytes, checksum: c52edde5b2edf7a0dc3516fd910107e8 (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2016-07-13T14:38:59Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 marialuizaviannapessoademendonca.pdf: 4089662 bytes, checksum: c52edde5b2edf7a0dc3516fd910107e8 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2015-12-11 / No presente trabalho apresenta-se um estudo da História das Religiões de Mircea Eliade realizado sobre três aspectos desta obra: os aspectos epistemológico, metodológico e categorial. Na primeira parte do trabalho, postula-se que a História das Religiões eliadiana se trata de uma disciplina autônoma e integral, com objeto próprio de estudo – o fenômeno religioso considerado no seu plano específico de referência, o plano religioso – e com método próprio de trabalho – um método histórico-fenomenológicohermenêutico unitário –; que tal disciplina gira em torno de dois eixos – a fenomenologia da religião stricto sensu e a história das religiões; que, no seu todo, a História das Religiões eliadiana tem o estatuto de uma fenomenologia existencial da religião, situando-se no âmbito da Filosofia. Na segunda parte deste trabalho discorre-se sobre o método apenas implícito na obra eliadiana, o qual leva em conta o aspecto histórico do fenômeno religioso e o qual conjuga fenomenologia e hermenêutica, desenvolvendo-se em dois planos: o primeiro plano é o da análise fenomenológicodescritiva do fenômeno religioso realizada no campo da fenomenologia da religião stricto sensu, no qual o autor romeno conforma sua morfologia do sagrado; o segundo plano é o da análise hermenêutico-filosófica dos fenômenos religiosos históricos, no qual o citado autor procede à interpretação dos fenômenos religiosos historicamente acontecidos para a elaboração de sua história das religiões; Eliade utiliza ainda a análise hermenêutico-filosófica dos simbolismos religiosos para a realização de uma hermenêutica filosófica dos símbolos religiosos por meio da qual formula juízos normativos sobre a condição humana. Na terceira parte deste trabalho, realiza-se um estudo das principais categorias do pensamento eliadiano com ênfase para a hierofania, a dialética da hierofania, a dialética do sagrado e do profano, o sagrado, a religião, a experiência religiosa, o espaço sagrado, tempo e história, o homo religiosus, o homem ocidental moderno a-religioso, o arquétipo, o arquétipo da coincidentia oppositorum, imagens e símbolos, a a-historicidade da vida religiosa, o símbolo religioso, o simbolismo religioso, o mito, o rito, a camuflagem e a ocultação do sagrado no profano, a irreconhecibilidade do sagrado na História (ou a irreconhecibilidade do milagre) e o sagrado no mundo ocidental secularizado. / In this thesis a study of Mircea Eliade’s History of Religions is presented carried through on three different approaches: the epistemological approach, the methodological approach and the categorical approach. In the first Chapter of this thesis, it is claimed that Eliade’s History of Religions constitutes an autonomous and integral discipline, with proper object of study – the religious phenomenon in its specific plan of reference, the religious plan - and with proper method of work – a unitary historical-phenomenological-hermeneutic method -; that such discipline turns around two axles – the phenomenology of religion stricto sensu and the history of religions -; that, in its all, the eliadian History of Religions has the statute of an existential phenomenology of religion placing itself in the branch of Philosophy. In the second Chapter of this thesis, it is discoursed on the only implicit method in the eliadian workmanship, which takes in account the historical aspect of the religious phenomenon and which conjugates phenomenology and hermeneutics, developing itself in two plans: the first plan is that of the phenomenological-descriptive analysis of the religious phenomenon carried through on the field of the phenomenology of religion stricto sensu, in which the Rumanian author conforms his morphology of the Sacred; the second plan is that of the hermeneutic-philosophical analysis of the historical religious phenomena in which the cited author proceeds to the interpretation of the religious phenomena historically happened for the elaboration of his history of religions; Eliade also use the hermeneutic-philosophical analysis of the religious symbolisms for the accomplishment of a philosophical hermeneutics of the religious symbols by means of which he formulates normative judgments on the human being condition. In the third Chapter of this work, a study of the main categories of the eliadian thought is developed with emphasis for the hierophany, the dialectic of the hierophany, the dialectic of the Sacred and the Profane, the Sacred, the religion, the religious experience, the sacred space, time and history, homo religiosus, the modern Occidental man of the secularized societies, the archetype, the archetype of coincidentia oppositorum, images and symbols, the non-historicity of the of religious life, the religious symbol, the religious symbolism, the Myth, the Rite, the Camouflage and the Occultation of the Sacred in the Profane, the unrecognizableness of the Sacred in History (or the unrecognizableness of miracle), and the Sacred in the modern secularized Occidental world.

Submitted by Daniel Schmitt (daniel@schmitt.adv.br) on 2017-03-08T14:29:56Z No. of bitstreams: 1 FGV - Trabalho de Qualificação da Dissertação (DS) (28-02-17).pdf: 1238374 bytes, checksum: 77427104099be295ae4735e8aae098ed (MD5) / Approved for entry into archive by Publicação Direito Rio (publicacao.direitorio@fgv.br) on 2017-03-15T18:39:05Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 FGV - Trabalho de Qualificação da Dissertação (DS) (28-02-17).pdf: 1238374 bytes, checksum: 77427104099be295ae4735e8aae098ed (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2017-03-23T13:10:50Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 FGV - Trabalho de Qualificação da Dissertação (DS) (28-02-17).pdf: 1238374 bytes, checksum: 77427104099be295ae4735e8aae098ed (MD5) Previous issue date: 2017 / This paper deals with the repressive regime in the private insurance market ('MSP'), supervised by SUSEP – Superintendência de Seguros Privados. The research focus is to investigate the structure and the application of the norms that govern SUSEP's regulatory activity, regarding the application of the administrative sanction of fine on the individual offender. The administrative accountability in these cases is analyzed. For that, the theory of sanctioning is dealt with, dealing with the violation and the administrative sanction, especially the administrative penalty of fine. Some of the main principles of administrative sanctioning law are also highlighted, such as due process, lawfulness, characteristics and culpability. It also addresses the issue of relativisation of legality in special compliance regimes. These issues are displayed in an environment of sectoral regulation, therefore, contextualizing the sanctioning power of regulatory agencies. The repressive regime of the MSP is systematized. It identifies the National Council of Private Insurance (CNSP), the Resource Council of the National Private Insurance System (CRSNSP) and SUSEP. The normative archetype of the repressive regime of the MSP is presented, especially CNSP Resolution 243/11. A confrontation between SUSEP's guidelines and decisions of the CRSNSP in the opposite direction is made, regarding the imposition of the administrative penalty of fine on the individual offender, due to its administrative responsibility. At the end, as an outcome of the research, a set of constraints that ensure a more consistent application of the administrative penalty of fines on individuals - when considered as offenders in the MSP – is proposed. / O presente trabalho aborda o regime repressivo no mercado de seguros privados ('MSP'), fiscalizado pela Superintendência de Seguros Privados (SUSEP). O problema de pesquisa é investigar a estrutura e a aplicação das normas que regem a atividade regulatória da SUSEP, no que toca a aplicação da sanção administrativa de multa sobre o infrator pessoa física. Analisa-se a responsabilização administrativa realizada nestes casos. Para tanto, aborda-se a teoria da sanção, tratando do ilícito e da sanção administrativa, em especial da penalidade administrativa de multa. Alguns princípios informadores do direito administrativo sancionador também são destacados, tais como o devido processo legal, a legalidade, a tipicidade e a culpabilidade. Aborda-se, também, a questão da relativização da legalidade nos regimes de sujeição especial. Estas questões são expostas em um ambiente de regulação setorial, portanto, contextualizando-se o poder sancionador dos órgãos reguladores. É realizada a sistematização do regime repressivo do MSP. Identifica-se o Conselho Nacional de Seguros Privados (CNSP), o Conselho de Recursos do Sistema Nacional de Seguros Privados (CRSNSP) e a SUSEP. O arquétipo normativo do regime repressivo do MSP é descrito, destacando-se a Resolução CNSP no 243/11. Realiza-se um confronto entre orientações da SUSEP e decisões do CRSNSP em sentido contrário, a respeito da imposição da sanção administrativa de multa sobre o infrator pessoa física, em razão da sua responsabilização administrativa. Ao final, como resultado de pesquisa, propõe-se um conjunto de condicionantes que asseguram uma aplicação juridicamente mais consistente da penalidade administrativa de multa sobre as pessoas físicas, quando consideradas como infratores no MSP.