Dissertation--Fachbereich Evangelische Theologie--Hamburg--Universität, 2007. / Bibliogr. p. 233-248.

Mémoire numérisé par la Direction des bibliothèques de l'Université de Montréal.

No description available.

Dans ce mémoire, nous voulons étudier la position du philosophe dans le monde commun chez Hannah Arendt. La vie contemplative qui le caractérise le place-t-il dans une position qui le détacherait du monde commun et qui pourrait légitimer une certaine supériorité? Nous commencerons par introduire le concept central de monde commun en rapport avec la menace totalitaire. En effet, le monde est un espace où les citoyens peuvent partager, échanger, communiquer en toute égalité de droits. C'est cet espace qui permet de poser des actions et donc d'être libres. Ensuite, dans un deuxième chapitre, nous étudierons la vision que Arendt a de la philosophie traditionnelle et plus particulièrement de l'histoire de la supériorité de la vie contemplative. Elle remarque deux principaux dangers à cette position soit le fait que cela rend le penseur inactif et que cela le conduit à une sorte de solipsisme ou isolement du monde. Puis, après avoir montré ce que notre auteure rejetait, c'est-à-dire la position de supériorité du philosophe professionnel, nous tenterons, dans un troisième et dernier chapitre de montrer ce que pourrait être la position «acceptable» du philosophe dans le monde commun. Pour ce faire, nous nous rapporterons aux études que Arendt avait faites de la pensée elle-même, contenues principalement dans les deux premiers tomes de La vie de l'esprit et dans les cours sur la philosophie politique de Kant qu'elle avait donnés et qui sont publiés à la fin de ce même ouvrage. Car pour étudier ce que pourrait être la position du philosophe, il faut voir ce qui se passe quand on pense et comment cela peut faire partie des activités au sein du monde commun. C'est principalement chez Kant que Arendt trouvera ce dont elle a besoin pour faire de la pensée -et donc des penseurs -un élément essentiel de la vie démocratique. Nous verrons qu'elle reprenait principalement la faculté d'imagination, la distinction entre Savoir et Raison et l'importance de la faculté de juger. Puis, nous terminerons en montrant comment Socrate pourrait devenir, dans cette mesure, un modèle de penseur-citoyen, d'un philosophe qui n'est pas hors du monde, mais qui au contraire s'y maintient et s'en nourrit. ______________________________________________________________________________ MOTS-CLÉS DE L’AUTEUR : Philosophie, Hannah Arendt, Naissance, Monde commun.

Although many historians assert the unity of the Enlightenment, their histories essentially belie this notion. Consequently, Enlightenment history is confused and meaningless, urging the reader to believe that diversity is similarity and faction is unity. Fundamental among the common denominators of these various interpretations, however, are the scientific method and empirical observation, as introduced by Newton. These, historians acclaim as the turning point when mankind escaped the ignorance of superstition and the oppression of the church, and embarked upon the modern secular age. The Enlightenment, however, founders immediately upon its own standards of empiricism and demonstrable philosophical tenets, with the exception of David Hume. As the most consistent and fearless empiricist of the era, Hume's is by far the most "legitimate" philosophy of the Enlightenment, but it starkly contrasts the rhetoric and ideology of the philosophe community, and, therefore, defies attempts by historians to incorporate it into the traditional Enlightenment picture. Hume, then, exposes the Enlightenment dilemma: either the Enlightenment is not empirical, but rather the new Age of Faith Carl Becker proclaimed it, or Enlightenment philosophy is that of Hume. This study presents the historical characterization of major Enlightenment themes, such as method, reason, religion, morality, and politics, then juxtaposes this picture with the particulars (data) that contradict or seriously qualify it. As a result, much superficial analysis, wishful thinking, even proselytizing is demonstrated in the traditional Enlightenment characterization, especially with regard to the widely heralded liberal and progressive legacy of the era. In contrast, Hume's conclusions, based on the method of Newton-the essence of "enlightened" philosophy, are presented, revealing the authoritarian character (and legacy) of the Enlightenment as well as the utility and relevance of its method when honestly and rigorously applied. Through David Hume, the twentieth century can truly acquire what the Enlightenment promised—an understanding of human nature and a genuinely secular society.

L'objectif de ce travail est double : contribuer à la théorisation de ce qu'il est convenu d'appeler les Nouvelles Pratiques Philosophiques, d'une part, et fournir un appui méthodologique à ceux qui exercent, ou souhaitent exercer, dans cette discipline, de l'autre. Il s'agira d'établir une passerelle entre les Nouvelles Pratiques Philosophiques, telles qu'elles se développent aujourd'hui et le milieu universitaire, afin de donner aux étudiants en philosophie un débouché professionnel autre que l'enseignement académique ou la recherche. Il apparaît en effet que le manque de débouchés professionnels pour la philosophie en France, en dehors de l'enseignement et de la recherche universitaire, explique en partie la désaffection des étudiants pour cette matière et que celle-ci aurait tout intérêt à s'ouvrir à des pratiques professionnelles qui répondent aujourd'hui à une véritable demande de la part du grand public et dont le principal intérêt est de fournir un outil pertinent d'éducation populaire. / The objective of this work is twofold: to contribute to the theory of the so-called New Philosophical Practices, on one hand, and provide methodological support to those working or wish to engage in this discipline , the other. It will establish a bridge between the New Philosophical Practices, as they are now developing and academia, to give philosophy students an outlet other than professional academic teaching or research. It appears that the lack of professional opportunities for philosophy in France, apart from teaching and academic research, partly student disaffection for this matter and that it would do well to open for business practices that today meet a real demand from the public and whose primary interest is to provide relevant public education tool.

Né à Chieti en 1728, Ferdinando Galiani – économiste, diplomate et philosophe – est un auteur prolifique des Lumières dont la carrière s’est déroulée entre l’Italie et la France. Après avoir reçu une formation humaniste et philosophique à Naples, de 1735 à 1759, Galiani est nommé, par le ministre Berardo Tanucci, secrétaire de l’ambassade napolitaine à Paris. Durant ces années parisiennes, de 1759 à 1769, il entre en contact avec les philosophes et les encyclopédistes, fréquente les salons de la capitale et en devient l’un des hôtes les plus prisés. Lorsqu’il doit rentrer définitivement à Naples, où il restera jusqu’à sa mort en 1787, le « petit abbé » reste en contact épistolaire avec les milieux parisiens, ne serait-ce que pour être informé des nouvelles politiques et littéraires. Depuis le XIXème siècle, l’historiographie a étudié ce penseur selon deux directions antagonistes : alors que de nombreux travaux ont privilégié une perspective économico-politique – en analysant notamment Della Moneta (1750) et les Dialogues sur le commerce des blés (1770) –, d’autres études ont insisté sur l’esprit « libertin » de cet animateur des salons parisiens. De ces aspects antinomiques, l’historiographie retient « deux Galiani », autrement dit le « sérieux » et le « léger ». Cette thèse se propose de dépasser cette dichotomie en prenant en considération diverses sources encore inexplorées et inédites en favorisant une approche transdisciplinaire. En effet, tout en occupant de hautes fonctions, Galiani produit un savoir philosophique important qui accompagne, nourrit et complète ses projets politiques. Notre recherche propose une analyse systématique de la pensée de Galiani en fonction des contextes historico-culturels dans lesquels celle-ci se développe, Naples et Paris, ainsi que l’étude de sa trajectoire sociale, notamment au sein de la République des Lettres, qui va de pair avec la construction d’un statut d’auteur. / Born in Chieti in 1728, Ferdinando Galiani - economist, diplomat and philosopher - is a prolific author of the Enlightenment whose career took place between Italy and France. After receiving a humanistic and philosophical education in Naples, from 1735 to 1759, Galiani was appointed, by Minister Berardo Tanucci, secretary of the Neapolitan Embassy in Paris. During these years, from 1759 to 1769, he made contact with philosophers and encyclopedists, frequented the salons of the capital and became one of the most sought-after guests. When he finally returned to Naples, where he lived until his death in 1787, the "little abbot" remained in epistolary contact with the Parisian circles to be informed of the political and literary news. Since the nineteenth century, historiography has studied this thinker in two opposing views: many studies have favored an economic-political perspective - analyzing in particular Della Moneta (1750) and the Dialogues sur le commerce des blés (1770) -; other studies have insisted on the "libertine" spirit of this animator of the Parisian salons. From these antinomic aspects, historiography retains "two Galiani", in other words, the "serious Galiani" and the "light-hearted Galiani". This thesis offers to go beyond this dichotomy, while taking into consideration various sources still unexplored and unpublished, by favoring a transdisciplinary approach. Galiani produces an important philosophical knowledge that accompanies, nourishes and completes his political projects. Our research offers a systematic analysis of Galiani's thought according to the historical-cultural contexts in which it develops, Naples and Paris; as well as an analysis of its social trajectory, specifically within the Republic of Letters, which goes hand and hand with the creation of his identity as an author.

Made available in DSpace on 2016-04-27T17:26:58Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Helderson Mariani Pires.pdf: 487629 bytes, checksum: 906eb15c38f5a1437010db0da7e13890 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2011-10-18 / In French Enlightenment, theatre was one of the main subjects discussed among its thinkers they used to be called philosophes, who fiercely expressed their ideas about the theatrical performance phenomenon and its possible pedagogical effectiveness, as well as about its social and political implications in 18th Century France. Jean-Jacques Rousseau playwright, musician, poet, novelist, that is: a philosophe found, on his view about theatre, the metaphor of the human laceration, that occurred in the passage of man's state of nature for that of life in society. The conflict between being and seeming, as well as the duel between amour de soi, which is present in the natural being, and amour propre, which artificializes the social being, is a fundamental matter for the understanding of the Genevan philosophe. Though this subject runs trough all his work, it is in the Lettre à d Alembert sur les spectacles that Rousseau devotes himself exclusively to perform his criticism about spectacles. Besides that, the text also brings a definition of the talent and the craft of the comedien, which is also suitable to the acteur, that is, the acting artist as a whole, be they a singer at Ópera Royal de Paris or a tragedian at Comédie Française. Thus, this research opted for the term actor, once it has the advantage of updating both the terms comédien and acteur of the French context at that time. Published in 1758, the Lettre constituted the response to d Alembert who, in his entry Genève, da Encyclopédie, defended theatre and its actors, then seen as socially inferior and devoid of political and religious rights. For that reason, the philosopher proposed the formation of a theatre company in Genève, in order to help educate the taste of Genevan citizens, an idea which would be strongly and radically rejected by Rousseau. The Lettre directly addresses the relation among the spectacles, the actor s performance and the corruption of the man in the society, and the aforementioned conflict between being and seeming is once again present. Such opposition is focused on the scope of the Parisian spectacles, designed as signs of a society which was accustomed to appearances and trivia that made the man more and more artificial, and therefore alienated from their essence and the virtues which are necessary for the constitution of a worthy citizen. 7 The work also offers a synthetic definition of the talent of the comedian and their art of imitating, that is, of adopting a character which is different from the one they have. Thus, the actor's craft is the simulation, the clear expression of the conflict between being and seeming, once it lives in their ability to deceive, to seduce the audience, seeming to be what they are not, offering themselves as a show in exchange for money. Rousseau therefore criticizes the luxurious habits and morals of the actor, mainly because it makes use of those artifices to corrupt the youth. To the author of the Lettre, the interpreter, because of their ability to switch characters in scenic play, becomes a metaphor for the paradoxical condition of man, which distanced themselves from nature and created the spectacle of culture. Rousseau's passion for theatre did not stop him from criticizing it so ruthlessly, as he saw in it not only a specific type of artistic representation, but also the representation of the condition of the human laceration. It was necessary, therefore, a new theater, with new actors capable and true in their craft of lying. That is the critic of representation that ran through the Lettre à d'Alembert and that made theater an essential paradigm of its author's thinking. It is worth noticing, yet, that the actor's craft may gain scenic efficiency from the criticism processed by Rousseau in that work. The parties that he throws to replace the French spectacles have as their main feature the figure of the citizen - actor and spectator of himself. The character - the one that the actor represents, often as a mere projection of themselves - must earn truth so that the theater earns strength. This new actor, with their ability to conceal through their scenic truth, is related to the philosophe and the artist who was Rousseau. That because he obsessively sought, in the practice of his thought, its coherence, making his life the stage for his aroused imagination / No Iluminismo Francês, o teatro era um dos principais temas discutidos entre seus pensadores os chamados philosophes, que expressavam de forma acirrada suas ideias sobre o fenômeno da representação teatral e sua possível eficácia pedagógica, bem como acerca de suas implicações sociais e políticas na França do século XVIII. Jean-Jacques Rousseau dramaturgo, músico, poeta, romancista, enfim: um philosophe encontrava, na sua visão sobre o teatro, a metáfora do dilaceramento humano, que se deu na passagem do homem do estado de natureza para aquele da vida em sociedade. O conflito entre o ser e o parecer, tanto quanto o duelo travado entre o amor-de-si, presente no homem natural, e o amor-próprio, que artificializa o homem social, são questões fundamentais para a compreensão do philosophe genebrino. Ainda que este tema percorra toda a sua obra, é na Lettre à d Alembert sur les spectacles que Rousseau se dedica exclusivamente a realizar sua crítica a respeito dos espetáculos. Além disso, o texto traz também uma definição sobre o talento e o ofício do comédien que é igualmente válida para o acteur, isto é, o artista da cena de modo geral, seja ele um cantor da Ópera Royal de Paris ou um ator trágico da Comédie Française. Assim, esta pesquisa optou pela adoção do termo ator, na medida em que ele proporciona a vantagem de atualizar para os nossos dias tanto o comédien quanto o acteur do contexto francês da época. Publicada em 1758, a Lettre constituía resposta a d Alembert, que, em seu verbete Genève, da Encyclopédie, fazia uma defesa do teatro e de seus atores, então vistos como socialmente inferiores e desprovidos de direitos políticos e religiosos. Por esta razão, o filósofo propunha a montagem de uma companhia de teatro em Genebra, de modo a auxiliar na educação do gosto dos cidadãos genebrinos, ideia que será recusada forte e radicalmente por Rousseau. Na Lettre, é abordada de forma direta a relação entre os espetáculos, a representação do ator e a corrupção do homem na sociedade, na qual torna a se fazer presente o conflito supracitado entre o ser e o parecer. Tal oposição é focalizada no âmbito dos espetáculos parisienses, concebidos como sinais de uma sociedade afeita a aparências e futilidades que tornavam o homem cada vez mais artificial e, portanto, distanciado de sua essência e das virtudes necessárias para a formação do digno cidadão. 5 A obra oferece ainda uma sintética definição acerca do talento do comediante e sua arte de imitar, isto é, de adotar um caráter diferente daquele que se tem. Assim, o ofício do ator constitui a simulação, a clara expressão do conflito entre o ser e o parecer, uma vez que vive de sua capacidade de enganar, de seduzir a platéia, parecendo ser o que não é, se dando como espetáculo em troca de dinheiro. Rousseau, portanto, critica os hábitos luxuosos e a moral do ator, principalmente porque este pode servir-se daqueles artifícios para corromper a juventude. Para o autor da Lettre, o intérprete, em razão de sua capacidade de trocar de personagens no jogo cênico, torna-se uma metáfora da condição paradoxal do homem, que se distanciou da natureza e criou o espetáculo da cultura. A paixão que Rousseau tinha pelo teatro não o impediu de criticá-lo de modo tão implacável, pois nele enxergava não apenas um tipo específico de representação artística, como também a representação da condição do dilaceramento humano. Fazia-se necessário, pois, um novo teatro, com novos atores capazes e verdadeiros no seu ofício de mentir. Eis a crítica da representação que percorreu a Lettre à d Alembert e que fez do teatro um paradigma essencial do pensamento de seu autor. Há de se notar, por fim, que o ofício do ator pode ganhar eficácia cênica a partir da crítica processada por Rousseau naquela obra. As festas que ele oferece em substituição aos espetáculos franceses têm como centro a figura do cidadão ator e espectador de si mesmo. O personagem o outro que o ator representa, muitas vezes enquanto mera projeção de si mesmo deve ganhar verdade para que o teatro ganhe força. Esse novo ator, com sua faculdade de iludir a partir de sua verdade cênica, está relacionado com o philosophe e o artista que foi Rousseau. Isto porque buscou, obsessivamente, na prática de seu pensamento a coerência deste, fazendo de sua vida o palco de sua imaginação inflamada

Le rapport à la souffrance est un symptôme majeur du rapport à l’existence. Nietzsche met en perspective ces rapports entre la civilisation chrétienne européenne et celui de la culture grecque antique. L’invention de l’art tragique apparaît comme un moyen de sublimer les souffrances dans une extase dionysiaque, elle est à la fois la manifestation de leur volonté de puissance face aux épreuves et une thérapie.Tandis que la logique de souffrance issue du socratisme et du christianisme entraîne un profond nihilisme. Le passage d’un type de logique de souffrance à l’autre s’est opéré par le pivot socratique. La tâche du philosophe médecin est alors d’inverser ce pivot afin de préparer la transvaluation des valeurs issues de la morale chrétienne. Cela pose alors le problème de l’esthétisation de l’existence. / The relationship with suffering is a major symptom of the relationship with existence. Nietzsche puts these relationships between modern European civilization and early Greek culture into perspective. The invention of Greek tragedy can be seen as a way of sublimating suffering in Dionysiac ecstasy. It is both a demonstration of their will to power faced with tragic events and therapy. On the other hand the logic of suffering stemming from Socratism and Christianity leads to profound nihilism. The transition from one type of logic of suffering to another is brought about by a Socratic reversal. The task of the philosophical doctor is to therefore bring about this inversion in order to prepare the transvaluation of values stemming from Christian morality. This raises de novo the problem of the aestheticisation of existence.

Habilitationsschrift-Marburg, 1963. / Bibliography p. [180]-196.