Texte remanié de: Habili.-schr.--Philosophische Fakultät--Dresden--Technische Universität, 1997. / Bibliogr. p. 325-334.

Humboldt-Univ., Diss.--Berlin, 2004.

Diss. Ph. D.--Germanic languages and literatures--Chapel Hill--University of North Carolina, 2000. / Mention parallèle de titre ou de responsabilité : Visual violence and the loss of selfhood in Günderrode, Hölderlin and Fichte. Bibliogr. p. 250-262. Résumé en anglais.

Zugl.: Halle (Saale), Univ., Diss., 2005

Zugl.: Braunschweig, Techn. Univ., Habil.-Schr., 2003

Thesis (Ph.D.)--Duquesne University, 2005. / Title from document title page. Abstract included in electronic submission form. Includes bibliographical references (p. 213-219) and index.

Diss.--Fachbereich Germanistik--Berlin--Freie Universität, 1993. / Bibliogr. p. 227-238.

Orientador: Marcos Lutz Muller / Dissertação (mestrado) - Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Instituto de Filosofia e Ciencias Humanas / Made available in DSpace on 2018-07-27T01:06:52Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Tomioka_SergioLuis_M.pdf: 11124015 bytes, checksum: 7d9fd848d49240cc6b69e5b1b19f39e1 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2000 / Resumo: Essa dissertação tem como tema a questão do princípio da ciência filosófica na obra hegeliana. O intuito da dissertação é mostrar que esse problema é uma preocupação perene na obra madura de Regel, desde o período em que o autor ministrava aulas na Universidade de Iena, nos inícios do século dezenove, até as últimas formulações do sistema, trinta anos depois. Esse problema é retomado nas interpretações do sistema hegeliano, tanto nas mais recentes como naquelas de seus discípulos e adversários, durante todo o século dezenove. Para mostrar como esse problema é tratado no período ienense, analisa-se um texto de 1801, A Diferença entre os sistemas de filosofia de Fichte e de Schelling, procurando por um lado relacioná-lo com as questões pós-kantianas da época, bem como com suas relações com o resto do sistema hegeliano posterior / Abstract: This dissertation focuses the problem of the begining of Science, considered from a hegelianpoint of view, that means, from a logic-speculative point of view. The intention is to show that this question is a long-term preocupation in Reger' s work. From his Iena-period until the last formulationsof his sistem, the question of how to make the begining of the philosophie appear. The critics and disciples contemporary to him and his modern commentators debate this theme of Regel' s work, as well. The problem has two main sides, one is to know how one counscience an approach that speeulative (philosophieal) point of view, and the other to know how do the speculative Science must beginn. To present this aspects of the so called Iena-period of Regel, is our intention to analyse the Differenz des Fichteschen und Schellingschen Systems der Philosophie (The diference between the systems of philosophy of Fichte and of Schelling) and to conect it with the pos-kantian discussion of the begining of the XIXth century, as with the rest of Regel' s philosophical Sistem / Mestrado / Mestre em Filosofia

Informe de Seminario para optar al grado de Licenciado en Filosofía

Déjà en son temps, les contemporains de Fichte ne s’entendaient pas sur l’esprit de sa philosophie et encore aujourd’hui la plupart de ses interprètes ont produit à son sujet des explications éloignées les unes des autres. Dans ce mémoire, notre recherche se donnera pour point de départ cette diversité des interprétations de la philosophie de Fichte dans la Doctrine de la science de 1794 (Grundlage). Nous proposerons de montrer que les divergences d’interprétations de cette doctrine sont dues en partie au fait que le mode de réfutation de Fichte n’a pas été suffisamment pris en compte. Si ses écrits paraissent sans cesse adopter différents camps, ce n’est pas parce qu’il les adopte, mais bien parce qu’il les problématise et les évalue à l’aune de sa propre méthode. Le chapitre 1 aura pour but d’identifier les notions les plus essentielles de la Grundlage. Pour ce faire, nous contextualiserons le développement de la pensée de Fichte depuis le début de l’Aufklärung jusqu’au post-kantisme, car nous pensons qu’en cette période se profile une méthode d’héritage sceptique, qui permet non seulement d’expliquer la nature du transcendantal, mais aussi les sources de la spécificité méthodologique de Fichte. La généalogie de ces notions nous permettra de comprendre dans le chapitre 2 comment Fichte les unifie dans un système et, dans le chapitre 3, comment il les intègre sous la méthode de réfutation que nous nommerons rétorsion apagogique, et qui consiste à s’approprier le discours de ses adversaires tout en prouvant leur contradiction. Enfin, le chapitre 4 illustrera cette méthode par le dépassement du criticisme où il s’agit pour Fichte de penser avec et contre Kant. / Already in his time, Fichte’s contemporaries disagreed about the spirit of his philosophy, and even today most of his interpreters have produced explanations of it that are far from each other. In this thesis, my research will take as its starting point this large range of interpretations of Fichte’s philosophy in the Science of Knowledge of 1794 (Grundlage). I will propose to demonstrate that the divergent interpretations of this doctrine are partly due to the fact that Fichte’s mode of refutation shows lack of sufficient consideration. If his writings seem to adopt different sides, it is not because he embraces them, but because he calls them into question and evaluates them according to his own method. Chapter 1 will identify the most essential notions of the Grundlage. To do so, I will contextualize the development of Fichte’s thought from the beginning of the Aufklärung to PostKantianism, for I believe that in these times a method of skeptical inheritance emerges, which allows to explain not only the nature of the transcendental, but also the sources of Fichte’s methodological specificity. The genealogy of these notions will allow understanding in Chapter 2 how Fichte unifies them in a system and, in Chapter 3, how he integrates them under the method of refutation that we will call apagogic retorsion, which consists in appropriating the discourse of his opponents while proving their contradiction. Finally, Chapter 4 will illustrate this method through the overcoming of criticalism where Fichte has to think with and against Kant.