Dans cette thèse, nous cherchons à penser les enjeux philosophiques de l’application de méthodes herméneutiques en histoire de la philosophie politique. À partir d’une étude comparative des interprétations de l’œuvre de Nicolas Machiavel offertes par Leo Strauss, Quentin Skinner et Claude Lefort, nous interrogeons le rapport que l’interprète institue avec le texte qu’il étudie. Nous montrons qu’il y a dans les trois cas un écart entre l’exposition théorique des principes herméneutiques et l’application effective de ces derniers. Nous soutenons que les divergences fondamentales entre les trois lectures des écrits machiavéliens ne trouvent pas leur fondement dans la différence des méthodes employées, mais proviennent en dernier lieu de la compréhension particulière qu’ils ont du rôle et du statut de la pensée de Machiavel. Autrement dit, nous cherchons à montrer que l’intérêt pour la signification de l’œuvre machiavélienne dépasse la simple analyse des écrits d’un auteur du passé; les trois interprètes entretiennent un rapport singulier à la pensée du secrétaire florentin. En ce sens, l’étude des herméneutiques de Strauss, Skinner et Lefort appliquées à Machiavel est indissociable d’une interrogation sur l’articulation entre interprétation et politique.

No description available.

This dissertation explores a unique body of historical writings published in the native-language newspapers of the Hawaiian kingdom during the 19th century and examines the incorporation of these materials into contemporary knowledge. Scholars of the 20th century have translated a fraction of the historical material, reorganized its contents and published those portions as reference texts on Hawaiian history, culture and ethnography. These English presentations, along with other translated texts have become an English-language canon of Hawaiian reference material that is widely used today. The canon of translated texts is problematic in that it alters the works of the original authors, recasting important auto-representational writings by Hawaiians of the 19th century into a modern Western framework. General reliance upon these translated texts has fostered a level of authority for the canon texts similar to that of primary source material. Such authority and reliance have in many ways eclipsed the Hawaiian authors' original works and have obscured the larger corpus of published writings from the period. General acceptance of the sufficiency of the translated works, a dearth of access tools and few fluent readers of Hawaiian has resulted in much of the archive of historical material remaining unutilized and largely inaccessible to date. However, the impetus of Hawaiian language renewal efforts and more recent Hawaiian scholarship has brought new attention to this body of writings, and such awareness is generating new efforts to rearticulate this neglected resource into the production of knowledge, now and in the future.

Zugl.: Mainz, Univ., Diss., 2004

Zugl.: Hamburg, Universiẗat, Diss., 2006.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--Universität Regensburg, 1997/98. / Includes bibliographical references (p. [358]-391) and index.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--Universität Regensburg, 1997/98. / Includes bibliographical references (p. [358]-391) and index.

Thesis (M.A.) - Carleton University, 2007. / Includes bibliographical references (p. 218-221). Also available in electronic format on the Internet.

Thesis (B.A.)--Haverford College, Dept. of History, 2009. / Includes bibliographical references.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Chicago, Dept. of Political Science, August 2002. / Includes bibliographical references. Also available on the Internet.