Spelling suggestions: "subject:"descartes, gene"" "subject:"descartes, ene""
11 |
Foundations of science and freedom : shifting scopes in the discourses of Descartes, Kant, Hegel and Marx / by Wayne Anthony ChristaudoChristaudo, Wayne Anthony January 1988 (has links)
Includes abstract / Bibliography: leaves 346-374 / viii, 374 leaves ; 30 cm. / Title page, contents and abstract only. The complete thesis in print form is available from the University Library. / Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Adelaide, 1988
|
12 |
Cybernetics and Christianity : the pattern that connectsGradwell, Vanessa May 06 1900 (has links)
Two important trends have been noted in humankind's thinking of the world. These are increasing dissatisfaction with the rigid, dichotomous views of the Cartesian-Newtonian paradigm, and an increasing awareness of humankind's gpirituality. This dissertation broaches both these trends by exploring the new paradigm, that of cybernetic epistemology, which is a far more holistic and spiritual perspective.
This is done as follows. Certain concepts from cybernetics are discussed in terms of their implications and meanings. These are then discussed from a spiritual perspective, (specifically Christian), according to how they fit with the Biblical understanding of God and His creation. The aim was to see if and how cybernetics and Christianity meet - how their basic assumptions about the world and life compare. The conclusion is that the relationship between cybernetics and Christianity is that they are both similar and different and this dissertation is about the pattern that connects the two. / Psychology / M.A. (Clinical Psychology)
|
13 |
The other before us? : a Deleuzean critique of phenomenological intersubjectivityHugo, Johan 12 1900 (has links)
Thesis (MPhil (Philosophy))--University of Stellenbosch, 2005. / This study seeks to give a philosophical account of, and justification for the intuition that
subjectivity is not a stable “Archimedean point” on the basis of which an intersubjective
relation can be founded, but is instead profoundly affected by each different “Other” with
which it enters into a relation.
As a preliminary to the positive philosophical account of how this might work in Part II
of the thesis, there is an attempt to critique certain of the classical accounts of
intersubjectivity found in phenomenology, in order to show that these positions cannot
give a satisfactory account of the type of intersubjective relation which gives rise to the
abovementioned intuition.
The thesis therefore starts off by examining the account of intersubjectivity in Husserl’s
Cartesian Meditations (especially the Fifth Meditation). Husserl is there engaged in an
attempt to overcome the charge of solipsism that might be levelled at phenomenology,
since phenomenology is concerned with experience as, by definition, the experience of
the subject. We try to show that Husserl cannot give a satisfactory account of the Other
because he tries to derive it from the Subject, and hence reduces the Other to the Same.
We then turn to two other phenomenological thinkers – Merleau-Ponty and Levinas, both
of whom are themselves critical of Husserl – to examine whether they provide a better
account, but conclude that (although each represents a certain advance over Husserl),
neither are able to provide a decisively better account, since each is still too caught up in
phenomenology and its focus on consciousness.
In Part II of the thesis, we then turn to a non- (or even anti-) phenomenological thinker,
namely Gilles Deleuze, to try and find an alternative theory that would be able to provide
the account we seek. Our contention is that Deleuze, by seeking to give an account of the
constitution of the subject itself, simultaneously provides an account of the constitution
of the Other as arising at the same time as the Subject.
Crucial to this account is the inversion of priority between the poles of a relation and the
relation itself. Deleuze argues that a relation is “external to its terms”, and precedes these
terms. Hence, by returning to a level which precedes consciousness and the order of
knowledge – that is, by returning to the level of the virtual multiplicities and singular
events that underlie and precede the actualization of these events and multiplicities in
distinct subjects and objects – we argue that Deleuze shows that, contra phenomenology,
there is in fact no primordial separation between subject and Other. The contention is
therefore that the problem of intersubjectivity as posed by phenomenology is a false one
that can be eluded by means of Deleuze’s philosophy. This philosophy is not based on the
subject, but instead shows the subject to be the product of an underlying network of
relations. Finally, we turn to Deleuze’s appropriation of Nietzsche to trace out the transformation of
“ethics” that result from adopting a position like that of Deleuze.
|
14 |
Being, eating and being eaten : deconstructing the ethical subjectVrba, Minka 12 1900 (has links)
Thesis (MPhil (Philosophy))--University of Stellenbosch, 2006. / This study constitutes a conceptual analysis and critique of the notion of the subject, and the concomitant notion of responsibility, as it has developed through the philosophical history of the modern subject. The aim of this study is to present the reader with a critical notion of responsibility. This study seeks to divorce such a position from the traditional, normative view of the subject, as typified by the Cartesian position. Following Derrida, a deconstructive reading of the subject’s conceptual development since Descartes is presented. What emerges from this reading is that, despite various re-conceptualisations of the subject by philosophers as influential and diverse as Nietzsche, Heidegger and Levinas, their respective positions continue to affirm the subject as human. The position presented in this study challenges this notion of the subject as human, with the goal of opening-up and displacing the ethical frontier between human and non-human. It is argued that displacing this ethical frontier introduces complex responsibilities. These complex responsibilities resist the violence inherent to normative positions that typically exclude the non-human – particularly the animal – from the sphere of responsibility.
|
15 |
Perspective vol. 20 no. 5 (Oct 1986)VanderVennen, Robert E., Pitt, Clifford C., Terpstra, Nicholas, Smidstra, Henry, VanderVennen, Robert E. 31 October 1986 (has links)
No description available.
|
16 |
Perspective vol. 20 no. 5 (Oct 1986) / Perspective (Institute for Christian Studies)VanderVennen, Robert E., Pitt, Clifford C., Terpstra, Nicholas, Smidstra, Henry, VanderVennen, Robert E. 26 March 2013 (has links)
No description available.
|
Page generated in 0.0455 seconds