No description available.

No description available.

In den Anfängen der Cultural Studies in der Birmingham School spielte Geschlecht eine eher untergeordnete Rolle. Bald wurden jedoch auch feministische Positionen herangezogen, um Ungleichheiten der Alltagspraxis zu erklären, die nicht klassentheoretisch zu fassen waren. In den Arbeiten von Rubin und Mulvey beispielsweise werden Geschlecht bzw. Geschlechtsunterscheidungen und -ungleichheiten durch makrosoziale Wissensstrukturen und kollektive Praktiken reproduziert.

The aim of this paper it to observe different approaches to human beings. Two major points of view will be that of Karl Marx and of Sigmund Freud. In which apects are their deffinitions of human being, behavior and thinking processes different and in which are they similar? How are their ideas transferred in the work of oher authors and where does it lead? Is it possible to find similar streams in the work of their followers? These are the two major questions that this paper will try to answer. Another meaning this paper should have is to create a meanigful and coherent source of various authors who were involved in examination of human being.

Submitted by Ana Paula Florentino Santos Pires (anapaulapires@fdv.br) on 2018-08-13T18:32:56Z No. of bitstreams: 1 bruno-gomes-borges-da-fonseca.pdf: 3115718 bytes, checksum: 7ca7b5be6fd35978e5a73d88f6e462ae (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2018-08-13T18:32:56Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 bruno-gomes-borges-da-fonseca.pdf: 3115718 bytes, checksum: 7ca7b5be6fd35978e5a73d88f6e462ae (MD5) Previous issue date: 2017-12-19 / Esta pesquisa analisou, na perspectiva marxiana, os sentidos do trabalho na condição de direito humano e fundamental no Estado democrático de direito brasileiro. Partiu da premissa de que o trabalho, além de ser determinado e condicionado pelo desenvolvimento das forças produtivas e das relações de produção e consubstanciar uma série de contradições e antagonismos, foi capturado pelo direito e, com isso, recebeu o status de direito humano e fundamental, com o surgimento de novos sentidos. A adoção do referencial teórico marxiano permitiu retomar o curso do trabalho na história e na vida material, cujos resultados possibilitaram verificar algumas das determinações incidentes sobre esse direito e suas mediações com outros processos, capazes de sinalizarem para a atual falta de sentido do direito humano e fundamental ao trabalho e alternativas para outros caminhos e interpretações. A análise do modo de produção capitalista e a definição do trabalho encontraram na obra marxiana um ponto de partida imprescindível para compreensão do direito humano e fundamental ao trabalho. A adoção desse marco teórico implicou na assunção do método dialético, em razão da ausência de plena autonomia entre teoria e método na obra marxiana. A dialética, na condição de método, foi fundamental para identificar as contradições e os antagonismos do direito humano e fundamental ao trabalho e tentar inseri-lo em uma ideia de totalidade social. A pesquisa justificou-se pela necessidade de refletir acerca do conteúdo do trabalho, capturado pelo direito e agregado do status de direito humano e fundamental, em cotejo com sua (re)construção no curso da história da humanidade e as determinações e as mediações impostas pelo modo de produzir capitalista, cujo caminhar parece permitir patentear supostas razões da omissão quanto ao seu sentido normativo, sua inaplicabilidade, refletir sobre a sua manutenção como categoria central e vital para o ser humano e à vida social e seus possíveis sentidos. Objetivou-se, com esta pesquisa, aplicar o método e o referencial teórico marxianos, em uma abordagem predominantemente jurídica, para descortinar os sentidos do direito humano e fundamental ao trabalho no Estado democrático de direito brasileiro. O primeiro capítulo tratou do método em Karl Marx e as dificuldades de sua aplicação em pesquisas jurídicas. O segundo capítulo promoveu uma incursão na historicidade do trabalho. O terceiro capítulo abordou os direitos fundamentais e fez uma aproximação entre direito e marxismo. O último capítulo apresentou vários sentidos do trabalho e os cotejou, mormente, com a definição de Karl Marx, ocasião na qual analisaram-se diversos sentidos para o direito humano e fundamental ao trabalho, em um rol exemplificativo, cuja sistematização constou das considerações finais. / This research has analyzed, on the Marxian perspective, the meanings of work as a human and fundamental right on the Democratic State of Law of Brazil. It starts from the premise that work, as well as being determined and conditioned by the development of productive forces and by the production relationships, as being consubstantiate of a series of contradictions and antagonisms, has been captured by Law and, with that, has been given the status of human and fundamental right, alongside the emergence of new meanings. The adoption of the Marxian theoretical frame of reference has allowed taking back the course of work on history and material life, whose results prompted the verification of some determinations that fall upon such right and its mediation with other processes, capable of signaling to the actual lack of meaning of the human and fundamental right to work and alternatives to other paths and interpretations. The analysis of the capitalist method of production and the definition of work have found on the Marxian literature an indispensable starting point to understanding the human and fundamental right to work. Adopting this theoretical standpoint has implied the assumption of the dialectic method, by reason of the absence of full autonomy between theory and method on the Marxian literature. Dialectic, as a method, was fundamental to identifying the contradictions and antagonisms of the human and fundamental right to work and to the attempt of inserting it into an idea of social totality. This research is justified by the need to reflect upon the contents of work, captured by Law and added to the status of human and fundamental right, comparing it to its (re)construction in the course of humanity’s history and the determinations and mediations imposed by the capitalist method of production, whose path seems to allow patenting alleged reasons to the omission of the normative sense, its inapplicability, to reflect upon its maintenance as a central and vital category for the human being and to social life and its possible meanings. The object of this research is to apply the Marxian method and theoretical frame of reference, in a predominantly legal approach, to unveil the meanings of the human and fundamental right to work on the Brazilian Democratic State of Law. The first chapter conveyed the method on Karl Marx and the difficulty of its application on legal researches. The second chapter promoted an incursion on the historicity of work. The third chapter broached the fundamental rights and made an approximation between Law and Marxism. The last chapter presented various meanings of work and collated them principally with the definition of Karl Marx, on which occasion several meanings of the human and fundamental right to work were analyzed, in a list of examples, that are systematized on the final considerations.

Made available in DSpace on 2016-04-29T13:31:02Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Karla Rampim Xavier.pdf: 941756 bytes, checksum: f41267099887014650ca6ad1a143509b (MD5) Previous issue date: 2013-06-11 / Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior / In psychoanalytic praxis the symptom is a concept widely worked which intervenes both in clinical practice and the politics of psychoanalysis, meanwhile it is a subject intrinsically linked to the social bond. The symptom is precisely the truth that makes disorder, it is opposition face to mastery discourse. In Freud s theory it seems not to be possible to formalize a symptom as social. However with Lacan such formalization is possible due to the thesis that it was Marx who invented the symptom. To enter this question was necessary to research what is symptom for Lacan, and thereafter ascertain the Lacanian references that trace direct connection between psychoanalysis and Marxist theory, as well as analysis of homology between surplus-jouissance and surplus-value. In this way that it is intended the understanding of Marx as inventor of the symptom. What we see is that a lot has been said about the social symptom, often without the necessary theoretical rigor, but for Lacan there is only a social symptom, "each individual is really a proletarian." But anyway, what does this mean? To conclude, we analyze how controversial and divergent this issue may be. Furthermore, we analyze how the theory of social symptom can be a resource for the psychoanalyst on the issues of bond and polis / Na práxis psicanalítica o sintoma é um conceito amplamente trabalhado e que intervém tanto na prática clínica quanto na política da psicanálise, ao mesmo tempo é um tema intrínsecamente ligado ao laço social. O sintoma é justamente a verdade que faz desordem, ele é oposição frente ao discurso de mestria. Para Freud não parece possível formalizar um sintoma como social, no entanto, com Lacan é possível tal formalização em decorrência da tese de que foi Marx quem inventou o sintoma. Para entrar nesta questão se fez necessário pesquisar o que é sintoma para Lacan, e a partir daí, averiguar as referências lacanianas que traçam conexão direta entre a psicanálise e a teoria marxiana, bem como a análise da homologia entre mais-de-gozar e mais-valia. É deste modo que se pretende a compreensão de Marx como inventor do sintoma. O que vemos é que muito se tem falado sobre o sintoma social, muitas vezes sem o rigor teórico necessário, mas para Lacan só há um sintoma social: cada indivíduo é realmente um proletário . Mas afinal, o que isso quer dizer? Para finalizar, analisamos o quão polêmico e divergente pode ser este tema. Além disso, consideramos o quanto a teoria de sintoma social pode ser um recurso para o psicanalista diante das questões do laço e da polis

Made available in DSpace on 2016-04-27T17:27:09Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Felipe Ramos Musetti.pdf: 1886097 bytes, checksum: 67dc5020ad380f49dca27aaf286c4fd5 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2014-12-19 / Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior / This dissertation investigates the way Karl Marx develops the relationship between political revolution and social revolution, in the 18th Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte, seeking to highlight the importance of historical rise and decadence of the bourgeoisie to the elucidation of the limits of politics. Intends to seize the internal nexus of studied written, explaining the genesis of the categorial complex that integrates the physiognomy of the Marxian reflection. Thus, the first two chapters of the dissertation are dedicated to analytical understanding of the formative period of Marx's thought, which outlines the new ontological position achieved by the author through the critics of politics, speculative philosophy and political economy. Highlighting the main aspects of Marxian analysis of social being, the third chapter seeks to demonstrate the way in which The 18th Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte enriches Marx s critics of politics, when addressing the loss of illusions around the bourgeois Republic and the movement in which the State completes its process of constitution, assuming the Bonapartist form. It is shown how the investigated text makes explicit the indissoluble link between civil society and political State, both finding in capital the common denominator and structuring principle. The dissertation, therefore, turns to the negative conception Marx s work, seeking to observe the role of the modern State in managing the order of capital and conserving the bourgeois ideology / A presente dissertação investiga o modo como Karl Marx desenvolve a relação entre revolução política e revolução social, na obra O 18 de brumário de Luís Bonaparte, procurando destacar a importância do processo de ascensão e decadência da burguesia para a elucidação dos limites da politicidade. Busca apreender os nexos internos do escrito estudado, explicitando a gênese do complexo categorial que integra a fisionomia da reflexão marxiana. Assim, os dois primeiros capítulos da dissertação são dedicados à compreensão analítica do período de formação do pensamento de Marx, a partir do qual se delineia a nova posição ontológica alcançada pelo Autor através de críticas à política, à filosofia especulativa e à economia política. Destacando os principais traços da análise marxiana do ser social, o terceiro capítulo procura mostrar o modo pelo qual a obra O 18 de brumário de Luís Bonaparte enriquece a crítica de Marx à política, ao abordar a perda das ilusões em torno da república burguesa e o movimento pelo qual o Estado completa o seu processo de constituição ao assumir a forma bonapartista. Mostra-se ainda como o texto investigado explicita, historicamente, o vínculo indissociável entre sociedade civil-burguesa e Estado político, ambos tendo o capital como denominador comum e princípio estruturante. A dissertação, desse modo, atenta para a concepção negativa da política na obra de Marx, procurando observar o papel do Estado moderno no gerenciamento da ordem do capital e na conservação da ideologia burguesa

No description available.

The dissertation examines the roots of modernity at the turn of the 20th century through the prism of the relationship between nationalism and internationalism. This seemingly incompatible affiliation between the two ideological archenemies has produced one of the most intriguing paradoxes of modern history. While theoretically attempting to reject nationalism as a transient product of capitalism, Marxism has in practice oftentimes exploited its appeal and utilized its extensive institutional repertoire. The study traces the evolution of Marxism’s conceptualization of the nationality question—a slow shift from an outright rejection of nationalism to an acceptance of its progressive features, complexity, varieties and influences. Interweaving intellectual and cultural studies in history with the political and intellectual history of the European Left, the study offers an intricate narrative of the crossroads of two important ideologies in theory and practice. The dissertation’s comparative and transnational approach reveals several important hitherto superficially explored aspects of Marxism’s difficult dialogue with nationalism. Firstly, it re-evaluates Karl Marx and Friedrich’s views on the nationality question, from its outright denial to limited acceptance and application. Secondly, it re-examines the multitude of Social Democratic responses to nationalism before the Great War. The advent of mass politics and the popularization of Marxist ideas produced a range of diverse socialist responses to the national conundrum throughout Europe. A comparison of Western (French and German), East Central and Eastern European (Austrian, Polish and Russian) and Soviet attitudes highlights some of the startling similarities and differences between the various groups’ ideological constellations. Finally, the dissertation uses the case study of the Communist Workers’ Party of Poland (Komunistyczna Partia Robotnicza Polski, KPRP) to reveal certain insights about the cumulative heritage of Marxist thought on nationalism. An analysis of the KPRP reveals a lot not only about a national party’s struggles with nationalism (challenging many historiographical questions), but also about the diverse conceptualizations of Marx and Engels’ thought on nationalism, about European Social Democracy’s debates about the phenomenon, and about the Soviet nationality policy (within and outside the Soviet Union).

The dissertation examines the roots of modernity at the turn of the 20th century through the prism of the relationship between nationalism and internationalism. This seemingly incompatible affiliation between the two ideological archenemies has produced one of the most intriguing paradoxes of modern history. While theoretically attempting to reject nationalism as a transient product of capitalism, Marxism has in practice oftentimes exploited its appeal and utilized its extensive institutional repertoire. The study traces the evolution of Marxism’s conceptualization of the nationality question—a slow shift from an outright rejection of nationalism to an acceptance of its progressive features, complexity, varieties and influences. Interweaving intellectual and cultural studies in history with the political and intellectual history of the European Left, the study offers an intricate narrative of the crossroads of two important ideologies in theory and practice. The dissertation’s comparative and transnational approach reveals several important hitherto superficially explored aspects of Marxism’s difficult dialogue with nationalism. Firstly, it re-evaluates Karl Marx and Friedrich’s views on the nationality question, from its outright denial to limited acceptance and application. Secondly, it re-examines the multitude of Social Democratic responses to nationalism before the Great War. The advent of mass politics and the popularization of Marxist ideas produced a range of diverse socialist responses to the national conundrum throughout Europe. A comparison of Western (French and German), East Central and Eastern European (Austrian, Polish and Russian) and Soviet attitudes highlights some of the startling similarities and differences between the various groups’ ideological constellations. Finally, the dissertation uses the case study of the Communist Workers’ Party of Poland (Komunistyczna Partia Robotnicza Polski, KPRP) to reveal certain insights about the cumulative heritage of Marxist thought on nationalism. An analysis of the KPRP reveals a lot not only about a national party’s struggles with nationalism (challenging many historiographical questions), but also about the diverse conceptualizations of Marx and Engels’ thought on nationalism, about European Social Democracy’s debates about the phenomenon, and about the Soviet nationality policy (within and outside the Soviet Union).