Submitted by Maicon Juliano Schmidt (maicons) on 2015-03-23T18:42:37Z No. of bitstreams: 1 Arnaldo Bastos Santos Neto.pdf: 2045082 bytes, checksum: df5bb0c83365c86e1e276044ad385a97 (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2015-03-23T18:42:37Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Arnaldo Bastos Santos Neto.pdf: 2045082 bytes, checksum: df5bb0c83365c86e1e276044ad385a97 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2010-12-06 / Nenhuma / A presente tese, eminentemente bibliográfica, se propõe investigar a questão da justiça nas obras de dois grandes pensadores do direito no século XX, o jurista austríaco Hans Kelsen e o sociólogo alemão Niklas Luhmann. O estudo se justifica pela atualidade que a questão da justiça possui como um dos temas centrais da teoria jurídica, da antiguidade aos dias atuais. A escolha dos dois autores vincula-se às posições teóricas de ambos no que diz respeito à autonomia do direito em relação à moral, o que os coloca num mesmo campo dentro do pensamento jurídico. Por um lado, Kelsen colocou em xeque, ainda com sua Teoria Pura do Direito ainda prisioneira do paradigma da teoria da ação, os aportes tradicionais das teorias jusnaturalistas, esvaziando os significados da justiça a ponto de denunciá-la como um ideal irracional a serviço de motivações ideológicas, produzindo um abandono de qualquer tentativa de fundamentar racionalmente a ideia de justiça. Por outro, Luhmann recupera a discussão da justiça dentro de um outro paradigma, o da teoria dos sistemas, que muda o foco de observação das teorias precedentes, centradas na ação individual ou no individualismo metodológico, para a observação das comunicações que operam internamente e entre si os diversos subsistemas sociais. As conclusões de Luhmann sobre a justiça como fórmula de contingência do subsistema jurídico, bem como as contribuições surgidas do diálogo entre a obra deste com pensadores como Gunther Teubner, Jacques Derrida e Michael Walzer, indicam a possibilidade de uma fundamentação para a justiça compreendida dentro de uma racionalidade sistêmica, adequada para a compreensão dos fenômenos que envolvem a sociedade fragmentada e global de nossa época. / This doctoral thesis, eminently bibliographical, proposes to investigate Law in the works of two great twentieth century philosophers of law: Austrian jurist Hans Kelsen and German sociologist Niklas Luhmann. The research justifies itself by the up- to-dateness that the question of justice has as one of the central subjects of jurisprudence, from ancient times to nowadays. The choice of the two authors is due to the theoretical positions of both of them related to the autonomy of law towards moral which situates them in a same field inside legal thinking. On one hand, Kelsen disputed, with his Pure Theory of Law - still captive of the paradigm of action theory -, the traditional contributions of Natural Law theories, empting the meanings of justice to the point of denuncing it as an irracional ideal serving ideological motivations, producing an abandonement of any attempt to rationaly fundament the idea of justice. On the other hand, Luhmann brings back the discussion of justice in a different paradigm, that of Systems Theory, which moves the observation focus from the precedent theories, concentrated on individual action or methodological individualism, towards the observation of communication that operates internaly and between themselves the diverse social subsystems. The conclusions of Luhmann about justice as a contingency formula of the legal subsystem, as the contributions that appeared in the dialogue between his work and thinkers as Gunther Teubner, Jacques Derrida and Michael Walzer, indicate the possibility of a fundamentation of justice understood within a systemical rationality, adequate to the understanding of the phenomena that surround the fragmented and global society of our time.

O presente estudo trata do conceito de esfera pública (Öffentlichkeit) na sociedade moderna a partir da teoria social de Niklas Luhmann. Não se trata, contudo, de mera exegese. É certo que a teoria luhmanniana é utilizada como guia do argumento e como referencial teórico básico, mas sua utilização é feita através de uma abordagem interdisciplinar que visa a dialogar tanto com a macro teoria dominante acerca da esfera pública (de Jürgen Habermas) quanto com problemas teóricos levantados por teorias de médio alcance que, preocupadas com a pesquisa empírica, evidenciaram problemas e fenômenos contemporâneos que não parecem ser passíveis de enfrentamento pela teoria habermasiana. Por isso, os desenvolvimentos da teoria dos sistemas sobre o conceito de esfera pública enfrentarão dois momentos de tensão: no primeiro Parte I do trabalho um enfrentamento teórico conceitual em face da teoria de Jürgen Habermas sobre a esfera pública, e no segundo Parte II com alguns problemas contemporâneos levantados para literatura atual: sua relação com o Estado e o sistema político, com os Tribunais Constitucionais, com os meios de comunicação em massa, com movimentos de protesto e com as pretensões de inclusão na sociedade mundial (Weltgesellschaft). / This study concern the concept of the public sphere (Öffentlichkeit) of modern society in the social theory of Niklas Luhmann. It is not, however, an exegetic study. Niklas Luhmanns theory constitutes the main guide-line of this study and functions as its basal theoretical framework. Nevertheless, the arguments here presented are carried on by an interdisciplinary approach, in order to perform a dialog not only with the dominant theory of the modern public sphere (Jürgen Habermas), but also with theoretical problems raised by middle range theories which are concerned which empirical research; and with contemporary problems and phenomena that do not seem to be tacked properly by the habermasian theory. Therefore, the systems theory model of modern public sphere faces two moments of tension: In the first one Part I it faces Jürgen Habermas theory of the public sphere. In the second Part II contemporary problems and issues are addressed: the relation among the public sphere, the State and the political system; the mass communication system; protest movements and the inclusion claims carried on in the world society (Weltgesellschaft).

Submitted by Silvana Teresinha Dornelles Studzinski (sstudzinski) on 2016-11-18T13:53:53Z No. of bitstreams: 1 Mateus Di Palma Back_.pdf: 1065653 bytes, checksum: d5a23ae5c08125bd959ac841e5c48e35 (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2016-11-18T13:53:53Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Mateus Di Palma Back_.pdf: 1065653 bytes, checksum: d5a23ae5c08125bd959ac841e5c48e35 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2016-08-16 / Nenhuma / Trata-se de dissertação que compara os conceitos de Direito carregados por categorias diferentes teorias do Direito. O conceito de norma jurídica descrito por Hans Kelsen e o conceito de expectativa normativa descrito por Niklas Luhmann têm em comum somente o fato de serem o produto de observações voltadas para uma realidade normativa. As suas semelhanças se encerram aí. Nesse sentido, a norma jurídica de Kelsen é marcada pela diferença entre o factual e o normativo, enquanto a expectativa normativa de Luhmann é marcada pela diferença entre o cognitivo e o normativo. Ainda que essas categorizações não sejam são diretamente comparáveis, na medida em que ambos esses conceitos são utilizados pelos seus autores para as suas descrições do Direito, esses conceitos tornam-se, na sua diferença, representativos da diferença que existe entre os conceitos de Direito que os fundamentam. Esse trabalho pretende se valer deles para realizar uma análise comparativa de ambas as descrições: entre o conceito normativo de Direito em Kelsen e o conceito sociológico em Luhmann. Ele será um trabalho bibliográfico e comparativo. A metodologia adotada será a seguinte: em um primeiro momento se apresentarão os fundamentos do modo descritivo da teoria do Direito de Kelsen; após, se apresentarão os fundamentos do modo descritivo da sociologia do Direito de Luhmann; e, ao final, se buscará, a partir dos conceitos-chave mencionados, os conceitos de Direito que os fundamentam para realizar a oposição dos diferentes modos de observação do Direito. Como resultado da pesquisa, concluiu-se que, ainda que realmente se compare um conceito analítico com outro funcional, as diferenças referentes aos conceitos não puderam ser resumidas ao potencial transdisciplinar das teorias, mas à uma opção de como se aproximar do objeto de pesquisa. / This is a dissertation which compares the concepts of law as presented by categories of diferent theories of Law. The concept of legal norm described by Hans Kelsen and the concept of normative expectations described by Niklas Luhmann have in common only the fact that they are the product of observations aimed at a normative reality. Their similarities end there. In this sense, Kelsen’s legal norm is marked by the difference between factual and normative, while Luhmann’s normative expectation is marked by the difference between cognitive and normative. These categorizations are not directly comparable, however, to the extent that both of these concepts are used by the authors for their descriptions of the law, these concepts become, in their difference, representative of the difference between the concepts of Law underlying them. This work intends to make use of them to carry out a comparative analysis of both descriptions: between Kelsen’s normative concept of law and Luhmann’s sociological one. It will be a bibliographical and comparative work. The way to do this is as follows: at first it will be presented the fundamentals of the descriptive mode of Kelsen’s theory of law; a second phase will present the fundamentals of the descriptive way of Luhmann’s sociology of law; in the end, it will be sought to derive, from the key concepts mentioned, those concepts of law underlying them for the purpose of oposing the different ways of observing the law. As a result of the research, it was concluded that, although it is really a comparison between an analytical concept with a functional one, differences related to the concepts could not be summarized to the transdisciplinary potential of theories, but to a choice of how to approach the object of research.

O presente estudo trata do conceito de esfera pública (Öffentlichkeit) na sociedade moderna a partir da teoria social de Niklas Luhmann. Não se trata, contudo, de mera exegese. É certo que a teoria luhmanniana é utilizada como guia do argumento e como referencial teórico básico, mas sua utilização é feita através de uma abordagem interdisciplinar que visa a dialogar tanto com a macro teoria dominante acerca da esfera pública (de Jürgen Habermas) quanto com problemas teóricos levantados por teorias de médio alcance que, preocupadas com a pesquisa empírica, evidenciaram problemas e fenômenos contemporâneos que não parecem ser passíveis de enfrentamento pela teoria habermasiana. Por isso, os desenvolvimentos da teoria dos sistemas sobre o conceito de esfera pública enfrentarão dois momentos de tensão: no primeiro Parte I do trabalho um enfrentamento teórico conceitual em face da teoria de Jürgen Habermas sobre a esfera pública, e no segundo Parte II com alguns problemas contemporâneos levantados para literatura atual: sua relação com o Estado e o sistema político, com os Tribunais Constitucionais, com os meios de comunicação em massa, com movimentos de protesto e com as pretensões de inclusão na sociedade mundial (Weltgesellschaft). / This study concern the concept of the public sphere (Öffentlichkeit) of modern society in the social theory of Niklas Luhmann. It is not, however, an exegetic study. Niklas Luhmanns theory constitutes the main guide-line of this study and functions as its basal theoretical framework. Nevertheless, the arguments here presented are carried on by an interdisciplinary approach, in order to perform a dialog not only with the dominant theory of the modern public sphere (Jürgen Habermas), but also with theoretical problems raised by middle range theories which are concerned which empirical research; and with contemporary problems and phenomena that do not seem to be tacked properly by the habermasian theory. Therefore, the systems theory model of modern public sphere faces two moments of tension: In the first one Part I it faces Jürgen Habermas theory of the public sphere. In the second Part II contemporary problems and issues are addressed: the relation among the public sphere, the State and the political system; the mass communication system; protest movements and the inclusion claims carried on in the world society (Weltgesellschaft).

本論文從系統分化的社會演化觀點嘗試提出對現代民主之內涵與民主化開展之可能性的另種論述。本文中所提及的「民主」與民主化不一定跳脫西方世界對相關概念的想像與定義，但在嘗試將「民主」視為政治系統用以描述自身之方式的這個主張而言，無論是西方式民主或者是其他種類的民主均能夠含括於其中。此外，民主化的開展僅被視為政治系統朝向「民主」的一種系統分化的社會演化過程。西方國家對民主的界定則是在此分化的演化發展中，透過宗教與政治、宗教與法律，以及政治與法律等系統彼此之間、以及從社會中分化出來而取得之形式「之一」。這是一個對系統而言不斷增加複雜性的過程，也正是在此過程中，對於民主或民主化之內容的界定變得越來越不容易。在本論文對西方與台灣民主化過程的探究中，嘗試指出的是一個類似的功能分化的社會演化與系統內部分化的相互辯證過程。這個辯證過程使現代「民主」概念得以作為一個「未預期之後果」而出現。 宗教對信仰自由的維護與對人權的爭取毋寧是來自於自身的信仰元素。換句話說，與之有關的論述是以一種自我指涉的運作方式而獲得實現。此種不斷回到自身之信仰以尋求論述之正當性的作法在操作上賦予了這些論述正當性，這便是系統的自我指涉運作。就此而言，系統毋寧是封閉的，其在自身之中不斷地自我生產有關信仰自由與人權的論述。然而，也正是因為其運作上的封閉，使得宗教（長老教會）所生產出來的論述與接續之行動均能夠在內部獲得支持，從而對自身而言具有正當性。這個正當性也成為其能夠進行觀察與自我描述的基礎。從系統論的觀點而言，長老教會在政治與社會關懷的論述與行動上，便是以封閉為基礎的開放性自我指涉運作。若非以此自我指涉的封閉且開放之運作為其系統形成的特性，那麼論述與行動的正當性便易於受到質疑，甚至無法獲得系統內部的支持。據此，現代社會以功能為主要分化形式的系統形成，至少在時間面向上均必須取得自我指涉或自主性運作上的正當性。這個正當性決定於系統在多大程度上能夠持續地維持與其環境的界線。長老教會對人權與信仰自由的主張與論述的建構，或許是與政治系統對相同論題的溝通存在著無法跨越的差異。這個差異同時也標示的是宗教與政治系統之間的那個界線，而這個差異的維持在系統分化的社會演化過程中，使得「民主（化）」作為政治系統乃至於社會描述自身的語意是可能的。 / This thesis draws on Niklas Luhmann’s theory of social systems, and examines the relationship between religion and democratization in Taiwan. In order to advance the analysis and to make some helpful suggestions, two points are firstly highlighted. One is the concept of democracy itself, and the other is the descriptions of it by the political system and by other social systems within society. The word ‘democracy’ has long history since ancient Greek city-state, however, its modern use and the meaning of it can possibly date back to the Middle ages, especially to the sixteenth century. Modern concept of democracy relates to the tradition of monotheism, in this case referring to the Reformation and later to the formation of Western political philosophy. The second point argues that ‘democracy’ is simply a self-description of society, and its realization lies in the transformation of the form of differentiation from hierarchical to functional. Luhmann would like to link the semantics to social evolution, by which he can investigate and explore the dialectical process between semantics and structures. The analysis of the relationship between democracy and democratization refers to this dialectical process, concerning systems differentiation and social evolution. Issues relating to democratization, the consolidation of democracies, and their discontented consequences, etc. need to be reconsidered in the sense that the concept of democracy and its modern descriptions utilize a ‘paradox’ which must be hidden while forming and maintaining identities, whether they be societies, nations, or individuals. This constitutes both positive and negative sides of the development of democracy, and also leads to crises gradually confronted by those ‘matured’ democratic Western countries and also by some third-wave democratizing regions. Among them exists a similar problem which will be discussed in this thesis: the concept of democracy and its modern developments are increasingly eroding its own foundation when the differentiation of subsystems and the evolution of society both go too far. This by no means indicates that there will not be any democracy in the near future. Instead, as an observer observing observations, this thesis inquires our present situations while at the same time attempting at offering some possible and also suitable questions from systems theory perspective.

[Truncated abstract] The dominant approaches to knowledge management practice and the design of knowledge management systems are driven by a resource-based view of knowledge. In this thesis, it is argued that the resource-based view of knowledge is limited and lacks social sensitivity. In this thesis, Knowledge Management is viewed as a social activity and the development and examination of an alternate approach to conceptualising the social processes of knowledge management in organisations, is the primary objective. In pursuing this objective, the question of whether an activity-based view of knowledge processes can assist the design of knowledge management practice and systems is examined. To address this research question, a conceptual framework is developed which redefines the conventional, universal approach to knowledge context . . . From an organisational perspective, the ABCs framework suggests that the institutionalisation and contextualisation of knowledge provides management with another dimension for considering knowledge management and knowledge management systems implementation. The findings from the case study suggest that knowledge workers are influenced by environmental factors. As a result, organisations can use this research to develop knowledge management practices that take environmental factors into consideration. As a starting point for organisations, the findings from the case studies are used to develop a set of guidelines for the design of knowledge management practice and systems. Further research is suggested in terms of extending to considerations of other aspects of Luhmann’s theories and exploring other complexity sciences as the basis of knowledge management.

Made available in DSpace on 2015-05-07T14:27:15Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 arquivototal.pdf: 696927 bytes, checksum: 12627f59e4a2fcad828b00cde008b28f (MD5) Previous issue date: 2012-05-14 / Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior / This research, bibliographic indeed, has as a goal to investigate the principal difficulties to correct the dysfunction of the Penal Brazilian System. It displays the theory of socials systems, by Niklas Luhmann, and its main principles, where the society is seeing by an autopoietic system, which itself produces and generates several social subsystems, such as political, economic and juridical. The juridical system has as main link mechanism with the other social systems the Federal Constitution, by which we select the juridical goods that deserve the protection of the Penal Economic Subsystem. The research identifies the systemic failures, because the working of the Penal System does not give the real protection to the Economical Order foreseen by the Constitution. Brazil, in the perspective of its political, economical and juridical systems, as a transitional system subject to external interferences, we analyze the main obstacles coming from its condition of system in development that blocks the necessary adjusts in the Penal Economical Law, searching to demystify the misunderstanding social thoughts, that the aggravation of the Penal measures or the edition of more criminal laws will block the growth of criminal actions. / Este estudo, eminentemente bibliográfico, tem por objetivo investigar as principais dificuldades para a correção das disfunções do sistema penal econômico no Brasil. Apresenta a teoria dos sistemas sociais, de Niklas Luhmann, e seus principais fundamentos, pelos quais se compreende a sociedade como um sistema autopoiético, que produz a si mesmo e gera diversos subsistemas sociais, como o político, o econômico e o jurídico. O sistema jurídico tem como principal mecanismo de conexão com os demais sistemas sociais a Constituição Federal, por meio da qual seleciona os bens jurídicos que merecem a proteção do subsistema penal econômico. A pesquisa identifica as falhas sistêmicas, em razão das quais o funcionamento do sistema penal econômico não confere a devida proteção à ordem econômica prevista na Constituição. Em seguida, concebendo o Brasil, sob a perspectiva de seus sistemas político, jurídico e econômico, como um sistema transicional, sujeito à interferências externas, analisa os principais obstáculos decorrentes de sua condição de sistema em desenvolvimento, que impedem os ajustes necessários no Direito Penal Econômico, buscando desmistificar o equivocado pensamento social de que o agravamento das medidas penais, ou a edição de mais leis criminalizadoras impedirá o crescimento da criminalidade.

No description available.

Die historischen Avantgardebewegungen haben mit dem Angriff auf die Autonomie der Kunst ein Erdbeben erzeugt, das sowohl die zeitgenössische Kunstpraxis als auch die ästhetische Theorie nachhaltig bewegt. Das Vermächtnis der historischen Avantgarden bleibt insofern als the Living Dead bestehen, als die Forderung, politisch wirksame Kunst zu schaffen, seit dem Beginn des 20. Jahrhunderts immer wieder begraben und wiederbelebt wird. Auf der Ebene der Theorie pendeln diese Debatten zwischen der Konzeption einer autonomen Kunst einerseits und einer heteronomen Kunst andererseits, wobei Erstere einer philosophischen und Letztere einer soziologischen Kontextualisierung von Kunst entspricht. Die vorliegende Arbeit stellt diese beiden Perspektiven – einmal die ästhetische Theorie von Jacques Rancière und einmal die Gesellschaftstheorie von Niklas Luhmann – nebeneinander und zeigt, wie ein künstlerisches Schaffen – hier Marko Peljhans Projekt Makrolab – zugleich politisch wirksam und politisch unwirksam sein kann. Mit diesem Schritt wird die Diskussion über politische Kunst auf die Diskussion über die Wirksamkeit verschoben. Es wird festgestellt, dass die Frage nach politisch wirksamer Kunst nur im Rahmen einer kulturhistorisch spezifischen Vorstellung von Wirksamkeit möglich ist. Wird diese Vorstellung von Wirksamkeit durch eine andere ersetzt, verliert die Frage nach politischer Kunst ihren Sinn, es erschließt sich jedoch ein neues Verständnis des gesellschaftlichen Wandels, das weit über die Themen der Kunst hinausgeht. / By attacking the autonomy of the arts, the historical avant-gardes caused an upheaval which has resonated in the contemporary artistic practices as well as in art theory to this day. The legacy of the historical avant-gardes remains in the state of the living dead, since the demands to make political art have since the beginning of the 20th century repeatedly been buried and resuscitated. On the level of theory, these debates have been oscillating between the concept of an autonomous sphere of art on the one side and the heteronomous sphere of art on the other, whereas the former corresponds to a philosophical and the latter to a sociological contextualisation of the arts. This text combines both of these perspectives, putting Jacques Rancière’s philosophy of art and Niklas Luhmann’s social theory side by side in order to show how a singular artwork – here Marko Peljhan’s project Makrolab – can be understood as politically efficient and not politically efficient at the same time. With this step the discussion about political art is shifted to a discussion about efficacy and brought to the conclusion that the question of political art is only possible within a frame of a culturally and historically specific conception of efficacy. When this specific conception of efficacy is replaced by another, the question about political art loses its meaning. However, it is exactly at this point that a new understanding of social change opens up, which reaches far beyond the domain of art theory.

A questão da justiça é tema sempre presente nas perquirições da filosofia do direito. Como tema recorrente deve ser submetido a novas investigações à luz de paradigmas teóricos alternativos e inovadores. A teoria dos sistemas de Niklas Luhmann representa um marco teórico capaz de inaugurar novos percursos investigativos no estudo da função do direito e de sua relação com a justiça, ora como função, ora como capacidade de adaptação. A ideia da autopoiese e sua elaboração na teoria dos sistemas de Luhmann torna possível observar essa relação entre direito e justiça dentro do contexto do aumento da complexidade e da contingência na sociedade moderna. A presente tese busca produzir uma investigação jusfilosófica, com inspiração interdisciplinar ao combinar-se com especulações teoréticas da sociologia jurídica de inspiração luhmanniana. Ao utilizar uma metodologia fundada na pesquisa bibliográfica primacialmente nos idiomas originais, a tese persegue a reconstrução da teoria da justiça na perspectiva do funcional-estruturalismo de Niklas Luhmann. Na consecução deste projeto, a tese utiliza a metáfora do horizonte, de matriz fenomenológica, para propor a dualidade entre justiça operativo-funcional e justiça adaptativo-mutante. Dualidade que servirá de baliza para conclusões desta tese que poderá trazer uma contribuição original à cultura jurídica nacional. / The problem of justice is an ever-present issue in the investigations of philosophy of law. As a recurring theme, it should be subjected to further investigation in the light of alternative and innovative theoretical paradigms. The systems theory of Niklas Luhmann is a theoretical framework capable of opening new routes for studies and researches on the role of law and its relation to justice, either as function either as adaptability. The idea of autopoiesis and its elaboration in Luhmann´s systems theory makes it possible to observe the relationship between law and justice within the context of the increased complexity and contingency in modern society. This thesis aims to produce an investigation in the philosophy of law with interdisciplinary inspiration when combined with theoretical speculations of legal sociology of luhmannian inspiration. Using a methodology based on a primary bibliographic research in works in their original language, the thesis pursues the reconstruction of the theory of justice from the perspective of functional-structuralism as thought by Niklas Luhmann. In pursuing this project, the thesis uses the metaphor of the horizon, in its phenomenological matrix, to propose the duality between justice as operation and adaptation (mutant). This duality will serve as a beacon for the conclusions produced in this thesis that can bring an original contribution to legal culture.