Orientador: Alcides Hector Rodriguez Benoit / Dissertação (mestrado) - Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Instituto de Filosofia e Ciências Humanas / Made available in DSpace on 2018-08-26T17:08:24Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Ribeiro_JoanirFernando_M.pdf: 921969 bytes, checksum: 3a6d57873fc32cbbccfb17153ecd1774 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2014 / Resumo: Algumas teorias de inspiração marxista afirmam que Marx estaria ultrapassado. Segundo esses marxistas, dentre os quais destacamos Louis Althusser, o capitalismo teria tomado rumo distinto do previsto por Marx. Assim, o fator econômico não seria mais o determinante na reprodução do sistema. Marx teria supostamente negligenciado novos fatores que se sobrepuseram ao econômico como reprodutores ideológicos das relações sociais de dominação, dentre eles o Estado como administrador do capital. O objetivo desta pesquisa é realizar uma leitura dialética da Seção I do Livro Primeiro da obra O Capital de Marx, buscando compreender em que medida Marx teria negligenciado acerca de uma teoria do Estado no capitalismo tardio. Para tanto, partimos do pressuposto de que é possível, por meio de uma exposição dialética, pensar a categoria Estado desde o início dessa obra de Marx. O grande desafio que O Capital apresenta é entender seu método de exposição que sujeita o aparecimento do conceito de Estado como totalidade desde o início e ao longo de seu desenvolvimento da obra. Dessa forma, procuramos mostrar que Marx pensa a categoria Estado dialeticamente presente-ausente já no primeiro capítulo d¿O Capital / Abstract: Some theories of marxist claim that Marx would be exceeded. According to these marxists, among which Louis Althusser, capitalism would have taken different direction predicted by Marx. Thus, the economic factor would not be the determining factor in the system's playing. Marx allegedly neglected new factors which overlapped the economic and ideological breeding of social relations of domination, including the state capital as administrator. The objective of this research is to perform a dialectical reading of Section I of Book First of the work Marx's Capital, trying to understand the extent to which Marx would have overlooked about a theory of the state in late capitalism. Therefore, we assume that it is possible, through a dialectical exposure, think the category State since the beginning of this work of Marx. The great challenge is to understand Capital presents its exposure method which makes the appearance of the concept of state as whole from the beginning and throughout its development work. Thus, we try to show that Marx thinks the State category dialectically present-absent in the first chapter of Capital / Mestrado / Filosofia / Mestre em Filosofia

The thesis is an investigation into the writings of Karl Marx and Max Weber, and the interpretations of their relationship in social thought. The interpretations of the relationship of these ideas have become polarized between Weberian and Marxist camps, characterized by Parsons and Weber. The paper begins with an examination of the writings of Max Weber, specifically with respect to his concepts of institutions, developmental theory, and theory of domination. The work of Marx is next examined with regard to these three topics. The interpretations offered by Parsons and Zeitlin are reviewed. The paper concludes that neither argument offered by Parsons or Zeitlin is altogether correct nor incorrect.

What are political thinkers doing with their words when they write a text, engage in a debate, or give a speech? We propose a "computational political theory", pairing recent breakthroughs in computational linguistics with the hermeneutic practices of intellectual history, as a set of tools for mapping out the political-discursive fields within which ideas circulate. We begin by showing, via a series of historical case studies, how a particular class of computational-linguistic algorithms called word embeddings are able to capture subtle differences in how authors employ certain contested terms (liberty, freedom, sovereignty, etc.) by explicitly modeling both the words and the contexts they're used in across a corpus of texts. We then demonstrate how the results of these embedding models can shed light on important questions in the history of political thought, by performing two in-depth studies of the origins and trajectories of Marxism from the 19th to the 20th century. In the first study, we use these models to trace the construction of Marx's thought out of the raw intellectual materials of 18th and early-19th century philosophy. We combine a new, comprehensive corpus of Marx's complete works from 1835 to 1883 ($N > 1200$) with a large sample ($N = 250$) of prominent 18th and early-19th century texts to measure conceptual distance between Marx's works and various schools of 19th-century thought (political economists, socialists, and Hegelian philosophers) over time. Two key breaks emerge in Marx's writings: (a) they become less Hegelian as he is exposed to Paris' brand of working-class-oriented socialism between 1843 and 1845, then (b) become more focused on issues of political economy over the remainder of his life in London, from 1849 onwards. Our second study turns from the origins to the illocutionary impacts of Marx's published works, assessing his influence on the broader socialist discourse of the 19th century using a corpus of \textit{post}-1850 socialist texts ($N = 200$). We find that Marx's semantic trajectory is mirrored, with a lag, by changes in the semantic trajectory of European socialist thought. This discourse shifts away from moralistic and Hegelian themes and towards a more positivistic political-economic vocabulary, especially after Marx's rise to public prominence in the wake of the 1871 Paris Commune. Our findings thus trace out, within the computationally-inferred ideological field of 19th-century socialist thought, how Marx's unique blend of German philosophy, French socialism, and British political economy defeated would-be competitors and established his thought as the default language of European socialism by the time of Engels' death in 1895. The dissertation thus demonstrates the utility of modern context-sensitive language models as tools for historical research, providing a framework for their use in developing, testing, and revising our understandings of key questions in the history of political thought.

Si le Marx de Michel Henry reconduit plusieurs thèses développées dans les écrits antérieurs et anticipe celles de « la trilogie » sur le christianisme, le dialogue qu’il instaure autour du thème de la praxis lui confère un statut singulier dans l’ensemble de l’oeuvre. Parce que Marx attribue à la pratique de l’individu et aux rapports réels entre les pratiques le pouvoir de créer les idéalités, notamment celle de la valeur, Henry est lui-même conduit à déplacer le champ d’immanence qu’il avait jusque-là situé du côté de l’ego et du corps vers la pratique et le système du travail vivant aux prises avec le monde objectif. Or du point de vue d’une phénoménologie matérielle, pour autant qu’il renvoie à un point de vue extérieur à la stricte immanence, le seul usage de la notion d’« individu » manifeste déjà une prise en compte de « la transcendance », poussant Henry à suspendre pour une part l’approche phénoménologique. Même si l’acosmisme de L’essence de la manifestation transparait encore dans le Marx, il est mis en tension extrême avec le monde des déterminations sociales et économiques et contraint l’auteur à développer la thèse de l’enracinement de ces déterminations dans l’immanence de la vie et de la praxis. C’est en même temps ce qui fait la force et l’originalité de la lecture henryenne de Marx. D’un autre côté, quand bien même elle hérite d’une éthique de la praxis, la trilogie semble perdre de vue la stricte individualité de la praxis qui apparaît dans le Marx. C’est ainsi que le concept de Vie Absolue qu’elle promeut est associé à une exigence d’universel que Henry avait préalablement disqualifiée, notamment à travers sa critique de Hegel. La thèse qu’on va lire cherche ainsi à rendre compte de l’originalité absolue du Marx dans l’oeuvre du phénoménologue français. / Although Michel Henry's book Marx (1976) both revives philosophical presuppositions that were developed in his previous writings and anticipates several themes that are central in his later writings (i.e., the Trilogy), Marx nevertheless is a particularly important moment in his oeuvre due to its elaboration of the concept of "praxis." Given that Marx locates the genesis of economic value in the individual's practical action, Henry is forced to shift his attention from his earlier focus on the ego and the body toward a more careful consideration of living labour, an activity constantly at grips with the objective world. When viewed from the vantage point of material phenomenology, and particularly given that such a perspective is external to immanence, the term "individual" (which replaces the term "ego") allows Henry to take into account transcendence, that is, in Marx we can see a suspension of phenomenology itself. Even though the acosmism that is defended by Henry in The Essence of Manifestation (1963) reappears in Marx, it is now presented in a state of extreme tension with the economic world, a tension that Henry tries to resolve by integrating socio-economic determinations into the immanence of life. This is precisely what makes Henry's reading of Marx so powerful and so original. On the other hand, Henry' s trilogy runs the risk of losing sight of the strict individuality of praxis, an aspect that was emphasized in Marx. Thus, even though the trilogy inherits an ethics of praxis, it nonetheless seems to us that Henry's concept of Absolute Life, as developed in the trilogy, requires a type of universalism that Henry himself had previously disqualified, notably in his critique of Hegel. The present dissertation defends the idea that there is an absolute originality to Marx in relation to the complete works of Michel Henry.

Le but de ce mémoire est de comprendre le concept d'aliénation dans la pensée du jeune Marx. Pour mieux comprendre I'origine du concept, nous verrons d'abord comment certains auteurs ont traité la question de 1'aliénation en abordant Rousseau dans un premier temps et la tradition hegelienne avec Hegel et Feuerbach par la suite. Puis, à partir d'une étude des textes philosophiques de Marx, nous dégagerons la signification de ce concept central en lien avec F anthropologic qui lui est associée. Nous verrons que Marx base sa pensée sur deux présupposés ontologiques qui guident I'ensemble de son discours sur Palienation. En examinant la révolution de la pensée marxienne, nous constaterons que le développement d'un des deux présupposés amène Marx à changer à la fois son anthropologic et sa conception de Palienation. Nous verrons que Marx, considérant d'abord l'homme comme un être rationnel en vient par la suite à le considérer comme un être travaillant. L'aliénation quant à elle, résidant d'abord dans PEtat, devient ensuite fondée dans la vie active de Petre humain.

Selon Michel Henry, l'objection de Marx à la figure hégéliennne de l'Idée absolue délimiterait chez ce dernier une ontologie de la praxis. Ce travail se veut une interprétation du concept de praxis chez le jeune Marx (1842-1845). Il retrace la genèse de ce concept à travers la critique de l'ontologie hégélienne, caractérisée ici comme ontologie du savoir. Il soutient que l'ontologie de la praxis servirait de fondement principiel (implicite) à toute l'œuvre de Marx. Tout en questionnant son interprétation henrienne, nous montrons l'incidence de cette ontologie dans les aspects épistémologique et éthique qui s'avèrent (explicitement) inhérents au concept marxien de praxis. Nous démontrons que seule l'acception ontologique de ce concept permet 1) de saisir la cohérence dans son usage chez l'auteur et 2) d'éclairer les fondements d'une philosophie reale qui prétendrait, paradoxalement, récuser le paradigme même de l'ontologie .

Entre 1857 et 1875, Marx s'engage dans une vaste analyse critique des formes économiques. Au centre de cette analyse, se déploie une théorie de la valeur qu'il n'aura de cesse de peaufiner et de remanier, jusque dans les éditions successives du premier livre du Capital. A-t-on à faire à une simple théorie économique? Ce n'est pas l'avis du phénoménologue Michel Henry. Selon ce dernier, la Contribution à la critique de l'économie politique et le Capital, qui contiennent la majeure partie de l'analyse marxienne des formes économiques, ne peuvent se comprendre sans qu'on les rapporte aux présupposés philosophiques contenus dans les ± Écrits de jeunesse de Marx ¿, écrits parmi lesquels se retrouve notamment l' Idéologie allemande, rédigée en 1846. Dans ce mémoire, et à la lumière de l'interprétation de Michel Henry, nous nous efforcerons de jeter un pont entre les deux périodes de la vie de Marx et de dissiper l'idée d'une séparation entre un Marx philosophe et un Marx économiste.

Submitted by Filipe dos Santos (fsantos@pucsp.br) on 2018-12-13T11:44:38Z No. of bitstreams: 1 Mariana Morás dos Santos.pdf: 772797 bytes, checksum: f208607e7f3eb8f0dfb48315fcc25dee (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2018-12-13T11:44:38Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Mariana Morás dos Santos.pdf: 772797 bytes, checksum: f208607e7f3eb8f0dfb48315fcc25dee (MD5) Previous issue date: 2018-09-13 / Conselho Nacional de Pesquisa e Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico - CNPq / This work aims to discuss the Politics and State categories and their limitations and possibilities in the direction of human emancipation, under the theoretical reference proposed by Jose Chasin, with a view mainly concerning the research by the German thinker Karl Marx and the contributions that followed his thoughts. As politics are historically established to mediate and respond to the contradictions associated with the exploitation of man by man, i.e., contradictions engendered by private property, they are not inherent qualities to the Social Being in its ontological status, and are, therefore, unnecessary for the full development of social relations. The State is analyzed as an institution that shapes and ensures social contradictions and, thus, cannot be seen as a possibility to overcome sociability condensed by private property, since it is in itself the expression of this sociability. It is necessary to point out that such sociability is founded, in the production and reproduction modes of life, through labor externalization, which will be expropriated from the producer. Thus, the fruits of labor appear as foreign and strange to those who produce them. This foreign and estrangement movement is elevated towards the producer relation with the world, to the other men and to himself, since human production is a generic form of production, outlining the being that is separated from the social community. Thus, the possibility of overcoming this kind of sociability, that forges a dehumanized being, is carried out by the radical revolution of the mode of production, and it is necessary to surpass the form of work configured as foreign, since such an overtaking is itself the key to raising man to his generic conscience and, thus, oppose in order to overcome the particular forms of estrangement of being in the world, that constitute themselves as a coagulation of the inhuman, such as religion and politics. Such radical revolution must engender a reappropriation of the social forces usurped by politics, as a way of overriding the State, leading to the dissolution of the political practice of dispute of the power of State / Este trabalho pretende discutir as categorias Política e Estado, suas limitações e possibilidades no rumo da emancipação humana, sob o referencial teórico proposto por José Chasin, com um olhar principalmente às obras do pensador alemão Karl Marx e às contribuições posteriores ao seu pensamento. Sendo a política constituída historicamente para mediar e responder as contradições ligadas à exploração do homem pelo homem, ou seja, contradições engendradas pela propriedade privada, ela não é predicado inerente ao Ser Social em seu estatuto ontológico, e, por isso, é desnecessária ao pleno desenvolvimento das relações sociais. O Estado é analisado enquanto instituição que plasma e assegura as contradições sociais, de onde não pode ser visto como possibilidade à ultrapassagem da sociabilidade condensada pela propriedade privada, pois é ele mesmo a expressão dessa sociabilidade. Faz-se necessário apontar que tal sociabilidade é composta no modo de produção e reprodução da vida, por meio da exteriorização do trabalho, que será expropriado do produtor. Sendo assim, o fruto do trabalho aparece como alheio e estranho a quem o produz. Tal movimento de alienação e estranhamento é elevado à relação do produtor com o mundo, com os outros homens e consigo mesmo, por ser a produção humana forma de produção genérica, delineando o ser que está apartado da comunidade social. Assim, constata-se que a possibilidade de ultrapassar tal tipo de sociabilidade que forja um ser desumanizado é pelo revolucionamento radical do modo de produção, sendo necessário ultrapassar a forma do trabalho que se configura como estranhado, pois tal ultrapassagem é ela mesma chave para elevar o homem à sua consciência genérica e, assim, combater com vistas à ultrapassagem das formas particulares de estranhamento do ser no mundo que se constituem como coagulação do inumano, como a religião e a política. Tal revolução radical deve engendrar uma reapropriação das forças sociais usurpadas pela política, como modo de suprassunção do Estado e, assim, a dissolução da prática política de disputa do poder de Estado

Doctorat en philosophie et lettres / info:eu-repo/semantics/nonPublished

Facultad de Filosofía y Humanidades / Tesis autorizada con embargo, disponible en texto competo en 2013 / Tesis para optar al grado de Magíster en Filosofía mención Axiología y Filosofía Política / El presente trabajo tiene como objetivo general demostrar la falta de comprensión por parte de Lenin del fenómeno moderno de la separación (enajenación) de lo político (Estado político) con respecto a lo social, que tendría como consecuencias teóricas concretas la imposibilidad, de comprender el proceso de burocratización del “Estado Soviético”, y de plantear teóricamente la temática de la extinción del Estado. Para realizar lo anterior se justifica la importancia atribuida a los textos de Marx escritos en los años 1843 y 1844 (“Crítica de la Filosofía del Derecho de Hegel” en adelante “La Crítica”, “La cuestión judía”, “Para una crítica de la Filosofía del Derecho de Hegel. Introducción” y “Glosas críticas al artículo „El rey de Prusia y la reforma social. Por un prusiano”). No serán analizados ni los llamados “Manuscritos económico-filosóficos”, ni tampoco, los escritos de Marx posteriores a 1844. Solamente nos referiremos a estos últimos para mostrar: (1) la permanencia de conceptos como, por ejemplo, el de alienación/enajenación en los escritos llamados de madurez; y, (2) en qué medida las experiencias reales del movimiento obrero influyeron en el devenir intelectual del revolucionario alemán. Luego, se expone la teoría leninista del Estado que podemos encontrar en su texto “El Estado y la Revolución”. Se concluye que: (1) existen diferencias importantes en las diversas interpretaciones de los escritos llamados de juventud; tanto desde un punto de vista “epistemológico”, como de un punto de vista “político”; (2) Leninconfundióel fenómeno del Estado moderno con el hecho de que el pueblo se encontrase separado e imposibilitado de participar de las funciones estatales, pudiendo ser así oprimido por la clase dominante mediante el poder del Estado; (3) con respecto al problema de las formas políticas que permitirían la extinción de todo Estado, Lenin no encontraría una solución satisfactoria. Finalmente se deja abierta la siguiente pregunta: ¿no cabría preguntarse acaso, si la posibilidad de una crítica de “la filosofía política”, y por lo tanto de la posibilidad de una teoría del Estado, debería partir de la crítica de “la economía política”?