Mediante o movimento filosófico ocorrido na Jônia e a investigação sobre a phýsis (inaugurada por seus primeiros sábios, na portuária Mileto), elegemos a cosmologia de Anaximandro como um terreno fecundo para explorar a noção grega de simetria. A partir de uma perspectiva geográfica, inicialmente, a originalidade dos gregos quanto à noção de justa medida será questionada, haja vista os conhecimentos astrológicos e matemáticos serem comuns na Babilônia e no Egito. Não obstante o ambiente cultural em seus portos comerciais e a arquitetura milésia demonstrarem indícios de um possível impacto oriental no pensamento grego, a partir dos fragmentos validados pela tradição doxográfica será notado que o problema quanto ao berço da noção de – harmonia e justa medida – era algo próprio da cultura grega e inerente à sua remota religiosidade. A retomada dessas noções remeterá à questão da arché e à sua divindade assumida por Tales, Anaximandro e Anaxímenes. O divino não era uma noção extrínseca ao pensamento milésio quanto ao elemento primeiro. Por isso, teremos como resultado dessa investigação alguns pressupostos nos quais a noção de simetria em Anaximandro – enunciada em seu ápeiron – poderia ser a partir do diálogo entre filosofia e orfismo, a assimilação do Uno, conforme testemunhou o papiro de Derveni. / Through the philosophical movements in Ionia and through researches made on phýsis (started by the first wise men in Miletus), we elected Anaximander‟s cosmology as a fertile ground for exploring the Greek notion of symmetry. From a geographical perspective, initially, the Greeks‟ originality towards the notion of a due measure will be questioned, since the astrological and mathematical knowledge were common in Babylon and Egypt. Although the cultural environment on the Milesian commercial ports and its architecture show evidences of a possible eastern impact on the Greek thought, it will be noted (from fragments validated by the Doxography tradition) that the problem with the birthplace of the notion of harmony and of due measure is something specific of the Greek culture and inherent to its remote religiosity. The resumption of these notions refers to the issue of arché and to its divinity assumed by Thales, Anaximander and Anaximenes. The divine was not an extrinsic notion to the Milesian thought towards the first element. Therefore, we will have as a result of this investigation some assumptions for which the notion of symmetry in Anaximander, stated in his ápeiron, could be, from the dialogue between philosophy and Orphism, an assimilation of the One, as witnessed in the Derveni papyrus. / Dissertação (Mestrado)

This work considers what ontology might be after the deconstruction of arché in Reiner Schürmann's and Giorgio Agamben's thinking. It addresses the question by reading Schürmanns historical deduction of the categories of presencing in his book Heidegger On being Acting: From Principles to Anarchy. This deduction is at the heart of his thought in that it tries to manifest what it means to live the transition from arché to an-arché, from a life under principles and why's, to a life without why, and the principle of anarchy. This transitional thought rests on what he calls the hypothesis of closure of the metaphysical field. The deduction is therefore a question of a relation between the first beginnings end as an other beginning. He shows this by establishing categories that are both conceptual- and sensible form. This reaches its full articulation in what he calls the categories of transition; categories in which the distinction between category and intuition seems to collapse – that are its own gaze or eye, that sees both the past and the future at the same time. This is a question regarding relationality: the transition from a causal relationality to an anarchic relationality, from a substance ontology to relational ontology. What is the relational status of the transition itself and its categories? This question lead to the main one: is the transition between arché and an-arché a relation between the two? The overall purpose is to explore this question in order to open, in the end, a path between him and Agamben. The later has pointed out that the key problem to live truly anarchic is a critique of the ontological relation because language presuppositional structure manifests in it, which takes its “full” form in his work The Use of Bodies. Here, perhaps – which we only can point to – Schürmann's thought can meet Agamben's in the caesura between arché and an-arché. Can anarchy ever be in a position of principle? In the end we will have to point to the notion of oikonomia as an area of further research to understand the question of anarchy between Agamben and Schürmann.