No description available.

No description available.

Jacques Derrida a ouvert un nouvel horizon pour concevoir l’écriture, en insistant notamment sur la dynamique de la différence qu’elle met en œuvre. Pour penser cette différence et pour libérer le texte d’un sens présupposé univoque, il sollicite Friedrich Nietzsche, mais sans étudier, pour autant, le lien qui rattache l’écriture de ce dernier à la question du corps. Quant à sa propre conception de l’écriture, il est frappant qu’elle ait été abondamment étudiée, sans que le lien qui l’unit à la question du corps reçoive toute l’attention méritée. Ce présent travail vise donc à penser l’écriture du corps chez Nietzsche et chez Derrida, ou plus exactement entre eux, en étudiant la « corporalisation » de l’écriture et la « textualisation » du corps. Nous montrons que, chacun à sa façon, Nietzsche et Derrida puisent dans l’ambiguïté corporelle pour élaborer de nouvelles dynamiques d’écriture, tout en donnant à penser le corps lui-même en termes d’écriture. Pour étudier ce double geste, nous lisons différents textes de Derrida, à partir desquels nous proposons une réflexion sur l’écriture du corps chez Nietzsche, sans que ce dernier y soit nécessairement mentionné. En effet, c’est l’hospitalité de l’écriture de Derrida elle-même qui invite à une telle démarche, que nous abordons en termes d’intrusion. / Jacques Derrida has opened a new horizon to conceive writing by insisting on the dynamic of “difference” that it implements. To address the question of difference, as well as to liberate the text from a presupposed unambiguous meaning, he solicits Friedrich Nietzsche without examining, however, the link which connects the writing of the latter with the question of the body. As for Derrida’s own conception of writing, what is striking is that while it has been widely studied, its link to the question of the body has not received the attention it deserves. Therefore this present work aims to consider the writing of the body in Nietzsche’s and Derrida’s philosophies, and more precisely between them, by studying the “corporization” of the writing and the “textualization” of the corporeity. We demonstrate that both Nietzsche and Derrida, each in his own way, draw from the body’s ambiguity to develop new dynamics of writing, and think about embodiment, at the same time, in terms of writing. To discuss these two aspects, we read various texts of Derrida, through which we also suggest a reflection on Nietzsche’s writing of the body, without the latter being necessarily mentioned. It is actually the hospitality of Derrida’s writing that allows such a gesture, which could be perceived more in terms of intrusion.

Embora a questão do esclarecimento não fosse novidade na História das Ciências, Gaston Bachelard (1884-1962) impôs-lhe várias mudanças ao demonstrar a historicidade da razão movendo-se para muito além das categorias a priori e negar uma continuidade necessária entre teorias e conceitos científicos. Por acreditar que a ciência é o local de onde emergem nossas verdades, Bachelard atribuiu à História das Ciências a tarefa de descrever as rupturas que marcaram os momentos em que o irracionalismo foi abandonado. A revolução metodológica imposta por seu trabalho e pelo etos responsável por ela deu dignidade filosófica à História das Ciências e fez com que os historiadores assumissem a postura de juízes, função que exige uma avaliação epistemológica do nosso passado científico através da sua persistência na ciência atual, razão pela qual podemos falar de uma História epistemológica. Por todas essas razões, ao escrevermos a história intelectual dessa nova disciplina pretendemos demonstrar que, não apenas a epistemologia bachelardiana se inscreve na tradição filosófica nietzschiana, como inaugurou a via de aproximação entre a história das ciências e a história social. / Although the question of enlightenment was no novelty in the History of Science, Gaston Bachelard (1884-1962) imposed several changes on it demonstrating the historicity of reason moving itself away from the idea of a priori categories and denying a necessary continuity among scientific concepts and theories. Because he believed that Science is the place where our truths emerge from, Bachelard argued that the task of History of Science was to describe the ruptures that marked the moments when irrationalism was abandoned. The methodological revolution imposed by his work and the ethos responsible for it gave philosophical dignity to the History of Science and made the historians assume the obligation of judgment, an assignment which they need to evaluate epistemologically our scientific past questioning its persistence through the actual science, reason why we can say that Bachelard inaugurated an epistemological History. For all this reasons, we think that the intellectual history of this new discipline allow us to understand the bachelardian epistemology in relation with the nietzschean tradition of critical philosophy and to demonstrate how it sets the basis for an approximation between history of science and social history.

Embora a questão do esclarecimento não fosse novidade na História das Ciências, Gaston Bachelard (1884-1962) impôs-lhe várias mudanças ao demonstrar a historicidade da razão movendo-se para muito além das categorias a priori e negar uma continuidade necessária entre teorias e conceitos científicos. Por acreditar que a ciência é o local de onde emergem nossas verdades, Bachelard atribuiu à História das Ciências a tarefa de descrever as rupturas que marcaram os momentos em que o irracionalismo foi abandonado. A revolução metodológica imposta por seu trabalho e pelo etos responsável por ela deu dignidade filosófica à História das Ciências e fez com que os historiadores assumissem a postura de juízes, função que exige uma avaliação epistemológica do nosso passado científico através da sua persistência na ciência atual, razão pela qual podemos falar de uma História epistemológica. Por todas essas razões, ao escrevermos a história intelectual dessa nova disciplina pretendemos demonstrar que, não apenas a epistemologia bachelardiana se inscreve na tradição filosófica nietzschiana, como inaugurou a via de aproximação entre a história das ciências e a história social. / Although the question of enlightenment was no novelty in the History of Science, Gaston Bachelard (1884-1962) imposed several changes on it demonstrating the historicity of reason moving itself away from the idea of a priori categories and denying a necessary continuity among scientific concepts and theories. Because he believed that Science is the place where our truths emerge from, Bachelard argued that the task of History of Science was to describe the ruptures that marked the moments when irrationalism was abandoned. The methodological revolution imposed by his work and the ethos responsible for it gave philosophical dignity to the History of Science and made the historians assume the obligation of judgment, an assignment which they need to evaluate epistemologically our scientific past questioning its persistence through the actual science, reason why we can say that Bachelard inaugurated an epistemological History. For all this reasons, we think that the intellectual history of this new discipline allow us to understand the bachelardian epistemology in relation with the nietzschean tradition of critical philosophy and to demonstrate how it sets the basis for an approximation between history of science and social history.

[pt] Protagonista de boa parte dos diálogos de Platão, Sócrates está presente também na filosofia de Friedrich Nietzsche, desde a primeira fase desta. Em ambos os casos, a figura do filósofo ateniense estabelece alguma relação com a música. Tendo como fio condutor uma célebre passagem do Fédon, buscaremos promover um confronto entre a imagem de Sócrates que Platão nos transmitiu e aquela criada pelo jovem Nietzsche, a fim de estabelecer pontos de contato e de afastamento entre esses dois personagens. Mais do que isso, buscaremos demonstrar o caráter decisivo de Sócrates nas filosofias de Platão e do jovem Nietzsche, perguntando, para tanto, de que maneira o personagem Sócrates veicula e encarna o pensamento de cada um desses filósofos no que diz respeito à música. / [fr] Protagoniste d une bonne partie des dialogues de Platon, Socrate est présent aussi dans la philosophie de Friedrich Nietzsche, depuis la première phase de celle-ci. Dans tous les deux cas, la figure du philosophe athénien a un certain rapport avec la musique. Ayant comme fil conducteur un célèbre passage du Phédon, nous essayerons de faire une confrontation entre l image de Socrate que Platon nous a transmise et celle créée par le jeune Nietzsche, afin d établir des points de contact et d éloignement entre ces deux personnages. En outre, nous essayerons de démontrer le caractère décisif de Socrate chez Platon et chez le jeune Nietzsche, en demandant de quelle manière le personnage Socrate véhicule et incarne la pensée de chacun de ces philosophes en ce qui concerne la musique.

Zugl.: Basel, Universiẗat, Diss., 2005.

Das Anliegen der Arbeit besteht darin, zu zeigen, dass der französische Dichter René Char (1907-1988) ausgehend von den ästhetischen Konzepten, die in der Schrift von Friedrich Nietzsche „Die Geburt der Tragödie aus dem Geiste der Musik“ formuliert sind, ein künstlerisches Selbstverständnis begründet, das auf einer tragischen Ästhetik ruht, und dass diese Ästhetik Chars Dichtung in hohem Maße prägt. In einem ersten Schritt wird das Konzept der tragischen Ästhetik entfaltet. Diese ist als Verschränkung der Prinzipien des Apollinischen und des Dionysischen zu verstehen. Das Konzept eines Zusammenspiels zweier gegensätzlicher Prinzipien,- des Apollinischen und des Dionysischen-, die nach Nietzsche das Phänomen der Kunst überhaupt möglich machen, ist der Höhepunkt einer langen europäischen Tradition ästhetischer Reflexion, welche die Ästhetik im Sinne einer doppelten Ästhetik denkt, als Zusammenspiel zwischen dem Schönen und dem Erhabenen. In einem zweiten Schritt wird untersucht, inwieweit diese doppelte Ästhetik als Tiefenstruktur die Lyrik Chars durchzieht. Es wird zunächst das apollinische Prinzip in der Lyrik Chars herausgearbeitet, z.B. die Bedeutung des Traums in seinen Gedichten und die daraus folgende Nähe Chars zu dem Surrealismus. In einem dritten Schritt wird das ästhetische Zusammenspiel zwischen Apollinischem und Dionysischem in Chars Dichtung analysiert. Dieses Zusammenspiel ist als dichterische Transfiguration der Negativität zu denken. Transfiguration der Negativität bedeutet in diesem Zusammenhang vor allem die poetische Umsetzung derjenigen Negativität, die vom Nationalsozialismus ausging, und die Char als Widerstandskämpfer erfahren hat. Bei der Untersuchung stellte sich heraus, dass Chars Lyrik eine ethische Dimension enthält, die in einer tragischen Ästhetik wurzelt, sodass man von einer im Ästhetischen begründeten Ethik sprechen kann, deren Kern die Gerechtigkeit ist. / The purpose of this work is to show that the french poet René Char (1907-1988) develops his esthetic comprehension of poetry through the concepts of Nietzsches early work „The birth of tragedy“ and that Chars poetry is essentially tragic. I first analyse the concept of tragic esthetic. Tragic esthetic consists in two principles, the apollinian and the dionysian. These principles constitute the dynamic of tragic esthetic. These principles are other forms of what the european esthetic tradition calls the beautiful and the sublime, and Nietzsches concepts result from this tradition. In a second step I analyse how these principles constitute the basics of Chars poetry. First I analyse the apollinian dimension of his poems, particularly the importance of dream and the surrealistic aspect of Chars poems. Then I analyse deeper the working of the dynamic of these two principles. This esthetic dynamic has to be understood as a transformation of negativity. Transformation of negativity means in Chars poetry first of all a poetic transformation of the nationalsocialist negativity, against which Char fought. By analysing this context, it appeared that Chars poetry contains an ethical dimension, which result from the tragic esthetic. And the heart of this ethical tragic esthetic is justice.

[pt] Esta tese é uma reflexão sobre a possibilidade de um discurso sobre a religiosidade a partir da morte de Deus. Procurei escavar interpretações a respeito da sentença Deus está morto!, presente nos aforismos 125 e 343, de A gaia ciência, de Friedrich Nietzsche (1844-1900) e confrontei-as com as ressonâncias desta proclamação na obra do filósofo francês Gabriel Marcel (1889-1973). Sobre os sentidos interpretativos da assertiva nietzschiana, apresento três aspectos fundamentais do Deus assassinado, nomeadamente: (a) o Deus metafísico; (b) o Deus moral; (c) o Deus cristão. Os textos de Marcel analisados na tese apontam a acolhida e a ressignificação do vaticínio nietzschiano. Nessa acolhida, as noções de drama, situação, universal concreto, transcendência e intersubjetividade mereceram especial cuidado investigativo. Esta última, calcada na relação eu-tu, constitui-se como verdadeira condição de possibilidade de abertura ao outro enquanto mistério. A partir deste confronto, procurei oferecer uma síntese própria que não é nem nietzschianismo, nem marcelianismo. Uma vez que não se segue como necessário de nossa situação histórica, marcada pelo deicídio, a ilegitimidade da religião, perseverei em repensá-la, ainda que sob aspectos e configurações não usuais. Disto seguiu-se uma reinterpretação de aspectos vários, situados entre metafísica e religiosidade, bem como entre moralidade e religiosidade, o que levou a reflexão sobre alguns desdobramentos éticos e sócio-políticos aí envolvidos. / [en] The present work sets forth a discussion on the possibility of a religious speech following the death of God. It was in my interest to dig for interpretations concerning Friederich Nietzsche s (1844-1900) statement found in The Gay Science s 125th and 343th aforisms - God is dead! - and to compare them to its echoes in Gabriel Marcel s (1889-1973) works. Upon the interpretative meanings to Nietzsche s statement, I present three fundamental aspects to the murdered God, namely: (a) the metaphysical God, (b) the moral God and (c) the christian God. The Marcelian texts analyzed here point out both the reception and ressignifications of Nietzsche s prediction. In this reception, the notions of drama, situation, concrete universe, transcendence and intersubjectivity deserved a very careful analysis. The latter, based on the I-thou relationship, became a real condition for an opening towards the others as some sort of mystery. From this confrontation, I tried to offer my own synthesis that is neither akin to Nietzscheism or Marcelism. Since the ilegitimacy of religion is not a necessary fact on our days, branded by the experience of this deicide, I strived to rethink it, albeit by non usual aspects and configurations. From that followed a reinterpretation of several aspects, situated between metaphysics and religiosity, as well as between morality and religiosity, which lead to the reflexion on some of the ethical and social-political developments that lie within the discussion.

<p>Through the notions of <em>the</em> <em>untimely</em> (l'intempestif) and <em>untimeliness</em> (intempestif) this paper seeks to gain a better understanding of the problematic surrounding and determining the concept of time in Deleuze. By tracing Deleuze's development of the concept of the untimely through Nietzsche and Kant, we are allowed to concretize the concept of time as pertaining to an experience of modernity (modern life), thus enabling us to better determine the place it holds within the philosophy of Deleuze itself - as a constitutive and productive problematic relating directly to the activity of thinking and being philosophically.</p>