No description available.

Cette étude consiste à questionner la légitimité de proposer un contenu sémantique définitif et une illustration picturale fixe aux poèmes de Léopold Sédar Senghor. Pour ce faire, elle démontre que la lecture des poèmes senghoriens est une expérience de phantasia permettant au sujet-lisant de se construire intérieurement, par l’énergie de la présentification, un livre-vu conforme au sens instable de la poésie senghorienne. Et, cette localisation du livre-vu au carrefour du perçu et du phantasmé n’est pas sans incidences sur l’intelligence de la poésie senghorienne ainsi que sur son illustration. Parce qu’en pointant l’impossibilité d’une saisie effective et définitive du sens des poèmes senghoriens, elle pose sans détours la question de la fiabilité et de la recevabilité des illustrations picturales de ces derniers. / This study offers a questioning of the legitimacy of a definitive semantic content and a fixed pictorial illustration of Léopold Sédar Senghor’s poems. To do this, it shows that the reading of senghorien poems is a phantasy experience allowing the reading-subject to build internally, by the energy of presentification, a picture-book conforms to the unstable meaning of Senghor’s poetry. And, the location of the picture-book at the crossroads between the perceived and the fantasized is not without implications for the understanding of Senghor's poetry as well as its illustration. Because in pointing the impossibility of an effective and definitive understanding of the meaning of senghorien poems, it asks bluntly raises the question of the reliability and admissibility of these pictorial illustrations.

A finalidade da pesquisa é estudar a écfrase, identificada como descrição na retórica latina, e a evidência, com a qual geralmente é confundida A écfrase contribui para provocar o efeito de visualização do discurso verbal, portanto, o estudo das teorias antigas que aproximam o meio verbal do visual serve como base para sua compreensão. Há certa profusão de nomes para o processo ecfrástico, gerando confusão ao se tentar estabelecer os limites e diferenças de cada procedimento. O processo imaginativo, teorizado por Aristóteles como fantasia, é parte fundamental para compreender como se manifesta a evidência (ou ainda enargia). Além da teoria, analisamos a aplicação dos conceitos estudados a partir de alguns exemplos do gênero épico e historiográfico, realizando também a tradução de tais textos. / The purpose of this paper is to study the ecfrase, known as description in Latin Rhetoric, which is normally confused with the evidence. The ecfrase contributes to cause a visualizations effect of the verbal speech. Therefore, the study of ancient theories approaches the verbal language to the visual, and works as basis for its comprehension. There is profusion of names to the ecfrastic process, creating confusion when we try to establish the limits and differences of each procedure. The imaginative process, theorized by Aristotle as phantasia, is a fundamental part to understand how the evidence (or enargia) works. Beyond the theory, we analyze the application of the concepts from some examples of epic and historiographic genres, also translating these texts.

A finalidade da pesquisa é estudar a écfrase, identificada como descrição na retórica latina, e a evidência, com a qual geralmente é confundida A écfrase contribui para provocar o efeito de visualização do discurso verbal, portanto, o estudo das teorias antigas que aproximam o meio verbal do visual serve como base para sua compreensão. Há certa profusão de nomes para o processo ecfrástico, gerando confusão ao se tentar estabelecer os limites e diferenças de cada procedimento. O processo imaginativo, teorizado por Aristóteles como fantasia, é parte fundamental para compreender como se manifesta a evidência (ou ainda enargia). Além da teoria, analisamos a aplicação dos conceitos estudados a partir de alguns exemplos do gênero épico e historiográfico, realizando também a tradução de tais textos. / The purpose of this paper is to study the ecfrase, known as description in Latin Rhetoric, which is normally confused with the evidence. The ecfrase contributes to cause a visualizations effect of the verbal speech. Therefore, the study of ancient theories approaches the verbal language to the visual, and works as basis for its comprehension. There is profusion of names to the ecfrastic process, creating confusion when we try to establish the limits and differences of each procedure. The imaginative process, theorized by Aristotle as phantasia, is a fundamental part to understand how the evidence (or enargia) works. Beyond the theory, we analyze the application of the concepts from some examples of epic and historiographic genres, also translating these texts.

No capítulo 3 do livro VII da Ética Nicomaquéia, Aristóteles explica a acrasia atribuindo ao acrático um erro cognitivo que consiste na não atualização da premissa particular do silogismo prático. A premissa particular do silogismo prático está vinculada à percepção sensível. Mas o que Aristóteles tem em mente ao fazer referência à percepção sensível? Ele deve ter em mente outra capacidade além dos cinco sentidos, ele deve ter em mente também a phantasia. Isto fica claro a partir do método utilizado para tratar das faculdades da alma. Segundo o método em questão, as faculdades da alma devem ser investigadas de acordo com a sua atividade própria e, antes disto, de acordo com o seu objeto correlato. Este método parece adequado para individualizar os cinco sentidos. As cores servem para individualizar a visão, os sons, a audição, os odores, o olfato, etc... Este método, contudo, tem as suas limitações, não é apenas quando sou estimulado por objetos externos que eu faço uso dos sentidos, é possível pensar em cores de olhos fechados, por exemplo. O objeto, portanto, não é o bastante para definir cada sentido, é necessário fazer referência à experiência que temos ao utilizar os sentidos. Esta experiência mental que está envolvida no uso dos sentidos corresponde a atividade da phantasia. A minha posição fica mais clara ainda a partir da discussão entre literalistas e espiritualistas. Essas duas tendênciaas interpretativas compreendem a afirmação de Aristóteles segundo a qual perceber é receber a forma sensível sem a matéria de formas distintas. Segundo o espiritualismo, receber a forma sensível sem a matéria significa alterar-se formalmente sem sofrer alteração material, isto é, perceber a cor branca, por exemplo, sem ser branqueado. Enquanto que, para o literalista, receber a forma sensível sem a matéria significa receber a forma sensível por transmissão. Temos assim uma fisiologia da percepção. O princípio da transmissão, contudo, não pode esgotar a explicação da percepção, é necessário pressupor um princípio formal irredutível que é a consciência sensível. A consciência sensível, por sua vez, é a phantasia. Uma evidência de que a phantasia é a consciência para Aristóteles é o fato de ela estar envolvida em todas as capacidades da alma que envolvem consciência: as capacidades sensíveis, a capacidade de desejar e de inteligir. É impossível tratar a percepção sem fazer referência à phantasia. Isto tudo que foi dito é vantajoso para análise da acrasia, uma vez que Aristóteles atribui duas características à phantasia. A phantasia depende da nossa vontade e pode ser influenciada pelos nossos desejos e emoções. Sendo assim, é possível encontrar uma espécie de conflito moral no caso da falha cognitiva de EN 7.3. / In chapter 3 of book VII of the Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle explains acrasia atributing to the acratic a cognitive failure which consists in the non-actualization of the particular premise of the practical syllogism. The particular premise of the practical syllogism is linked to sense perception. But what does Aristotle have in mind when he makes reference to sense perception? He must have in mind another capacity beyond the five senses, he must have in mind also phantasia. This is clear from the method used to deal with the faculties of the soul. According to the method in question, the faculties of the soul must be investigated according to their proper activity and, before that, according to their correlate object. This method seems appropriate to individualize the five senses. Colors serve to individualize sight, sounds, hearing, odors, smell, etc... This method, however, has its limitations, it is not only when I am stimulated by external objects that I make use of the senses, it is possible to think of colors with closed eyes, for example. The object, therefore, is not enough to define each sense, it is necessary to make reference to the experience that we have when using the senses. This mental experience that is involved in the use of the senses corresponds to the activity of phantasia. My position gets even clearer from the discussion between literalists and spiritualists. These two interpretative tendencies understand Aristotle's assertion that to perceive is to receive the sensible form without matter in distinct ways. According to spiritualism, to receive the sensible form without matter means to change formally without suffering material change, that is, to perceive the white color, for example, without being whitened. Whereas, for the literalist, receiving the sensible form without matter means receiving the sensible form by transmission. Thus we have a physiology of perception. The principle of transmission, however, can not exhaust the explanation of perception, it is necessary to presuppose an irreducible formal principle which is the sensitive consciousness. Sensitive consciousness, in turn, is phantasia. One evidence that phantasia is Aristotle's consciousness is that it is involved in all the capacities of the soul that involve consciousness: sensitive capacities, the capacity to desire and to understand. It is impossible to treat perception without reference to phantasia. All that has been said is advantageous for the analysis of acrasia, since Aristotle attributes two characteristics to phantasia. Phantasia depends on our will and can be influenced by our desires and emotions. Thus, it is possible to find a kind of moral conflict in the case of cognitive failure of EN 7.3.

This dissertation investigates Aristotle’s theory of phantasia as a cognitive ability, in terms of which mental content is available to the mind of rational beings. The focus is on Catherine Osborne’s extension of phantasia to nonhuman animals in order to allow for and explain non-human animal behaviour in terms of a rational paradigm, which de-emphasises, and does not rely on, linguistic ability. This paradigm for understanding animal behaviour as rational supports, and is supported by, modern theories of cognitive ethology, and argues for the ability of animals to share in conceptual thought. The recognition of rationality in animals by means of this paradigm bears ethical consequences for the treatment of animals. / Classics and Modern European Languages / M.A. (Classical Studies)

This dissertation investigates Aristotle’s theory of phantasia as a cognitive ability, in terms of which mental content is available to the mind of rational beings. The focus is on Catherine Osborne’s extension of phantasia to nonhuman animals in order to allow for and explain non-human animal behaviour in terms of a rational paradigm, which de-emphasises, and does not rely on, linguistic ability. This paradigm for understanding animal behaviour as rational supports, and is supported by, modern theories of cognitive ethology, and argues for the ability of animals to share in conceptual thought. The recognition of rationality in animals by means of this paradigm bears ethical consequences for the treatment of animals. / Classics and Modern European Languages / M.A. (Classical Studies)

Le traité De l’âme (DA) et les traités connexes (Parva Naturalia) contiennent les éléments d’une théorie de la phantasia, souvent nommée « imagination », ou « représentation ». Dans ce texte, Aristote affirme à plusieurs reprises qu’il est impossible de penser quoi que ce soit sans phantasia. Le DA contient toutefois peu de précisions quant à la portée de cette affirmation. Ce que cela signifie trouve cependant une élucidation si l’on transfert la théorie de la phantasia à un autre texte, les Seconds Analytiques II, 19, portant sur l’acquisition du premier savoir universel à partir de la perception, et des premiers principes intelligibles. Cette étude se propose d’abord de montrer en quoi la théorie de la phantasia s’applique aux SA, et comment ce texte, lu en regard de la phantasia, peut répondre à la question de savoir ce que cela signifie que l’intellect doit nécessairement s’appuyer sur la phantasia pour penser. / The treaty On the Soul (DA) and the connex treaties (Parva Naturalia) expose a theory of phantasia, often translated as « imagination » or « representation ». In the DA, Aristotle maintains that it is impossible to think without phantasia, yet this text offers little precision on the exact signification of his affirmation. An elucidation may however be found in another text, the Posterior Analytics II, 19, which focuses on the acquisition of knowledge, that is, the first universals implanted by perception and the first intelligible principles. This text, as we will firstly demonstrate, has to be read in the frame of the theory of phantasia, which will show that the acquisition of klowledge depends on phantasia. Thus and secondly, it will be clearer what it means that it is impossible for the intellect to think without phantasia.

Au cours des décennies 1970 et 1980, alors que le statut des immigrants et la question de leur intégration alimentent débats et controverses en France, trois écrivains proposent chacun le récit d’un Maghrébin vivant à Paris qui interroge la société et dénonce ses dysfonctionnements. Ce mémoire vise à montrer l’apport de Mohammed Dib (Habel, 1977), d’Abdelwahab Meddeb (Phantasia, 1986) et d’Annie Cohen (L’Édifice invisible, 1988) aux représentations nouvelles de la capitale apparues dans l’imaginaire social depuis la décolonisation. Face à la suprématie de la culture française, les protagonistes proposent une ouverture radicale à l’altérité et questionnent les processus d’aliénation et de renforcement du statu quo identitaire et culturel. Une modalité d’écriture commune aux romans à l’étude, la promenade conduit les trois auteurs à travailler sur la mise en forme du récit tout en plaçant les héros en opposition face à l’évolution urbaine et la société occidentale consumériste. / During the 1970s and 1980s, while the status of immigrants and the question of their integration are feeding debate and controversy in France, three writers offer the story of a North African living in Paris who questions society and denounces its shortcomings. This dissertation aims to show the contribution of Mohammed Dib (Habel, 1977), Abdelwahab Meddeb (Phantasia, 1986) and Annie Cohen (L’Édifice invisible, 1988) to new representations of Paris that appeared in the social imaginary after decolonization. Given the supremacy of French culture, the protagonists offer a radical openness to alterity and question the alienation process and the status quo in the matters of culture and identity. A theme common to the three novels analyzed, the “promenade” leads their authors to work on the formatting of the story while placing the heroes in opposition to the changing urban and consumerist Western society.

Au cours des décennies 1970 et 1980, alors que le statut des immigrants et la question de leur intégration alimentent débats et controverses en France, trois écrivains proposent chacun le récit d’un Maghrébin vivant à Paris qui interroge la société et dénonce ses dysfonctionnements. Ce mémoire vise à montrer l’apport de Mohammed Dib (Habel, 1977), d’Abdelwahab Meddeb (Phantasia, 1986) et d’Annie Cohen (L’Édifice invisible, 1988) aux représentations nouvelles de la capitale apparues dans l’imaginaire social depuis la décolonisation. Face à la suprématie de la culture française, les protagonistes proposent une ouverture radicale à l’altérité et questionnent les processus d’aliénation et de renforcement du statu quo identitaire et culturel. Une modalité d’écriture commune aux romans à l’étude, la promenade conduit les trois auteurs à travailler sur la mise en forme du récit tout en plaçant les héros en opposition face à l’évolution urbaine et la société occidentale consumériste. / During the 1970s and 1980s, while the status of immigrants and the question of their integration are feeding debate and controversy in France, three writers offer the story of a North African living in Paris who questions society and denounces its shortcomings. This dissertation aims to show the contribution of Mohammed Dib (Habel, 1977), Abdelwahab Meddeb (Phantasia, 1986) and Annie Cohen (L’Édifice invisible, 1988) to new representations of Paris that appeared in the social imaginary after decolonization. Given the supremacy of French culture, the protagonists offer a radical openness to alterity and question the alienation process and the status quo in the matters of culture and identity. A theme common to the three novels analyzed, the “promenade” leads their authors to work on the formatting of the story while placing the heroes in opposition to the changing urban and consumerist Western society.