Le corpus de films est constitué par les films amateurs tournés par les coloniaux dans les colonies françaises, Madagascar et le Sénégal. Ce corpus source est enrichi des films contemporains les utilisant. Dans le cadre d'une pratique d'action-recherche, deux films ont été réalisés. En 3 mouvements nous avons essayé de déterminer la valeur des films amateurs coloniaux aujourd’hui. Nous nous sommes appuyés sur l’anthropologie pragmatique et la philosophie de l’ordinaire pour comprendre les enjeux de ces films. Nos enquêtes révèlent que cette absence de valeur correspond à un déni de réalité de la situation coloniale, niant à la fois les injustices et les liens affectifs qui avaient pu être créées principalement entre les enfants de colons et les domestiques. D'où le paradoxe : des films dits "domestiques", les domestiques sont absents. Cette absence est essentielle. Sans les nounous et les boys, ces films sont des no man’s land. De plus, le contexte colonial crée un rapport d'illégitimité voir d'illégalité de ces films. En conclusion nous proposons d'une part une méthode de reconstruction cinématographique qui mette au cœur de son dispositif les trois acteurs liés aux films amateurs : les filmeurs, les filmés, les personnes dans le Hors champs. D'autre part nous proposons la création d'un institut des films amateurs coloniaux reposant sur des principes établis par un éthique de l'archivistique audiovisuelle et qui permettrait aux anciens colonisés de se réapproprier les images spoliées de leur propre passé à une époque où il y avait un monopole des moyens de production audiovisuelle. Cela répondrait à une justice mémorielle, audiovisuelle et affective. / The films corpus is made by amateur films shot by colonials in the French colonies, Madagascar and Senegal. This source corpus is enriched by contemporary films using these amateur films and films from the colonial era. As part of a practice of action research, two films were made. In 3 movements we tried to determine the value colonial home movies may have today. We relied on the pragmatic anthropology and ordinary philosophy to understand the issues of these films. The starting assumption was that these films had been abandoned, they had no more value as a result of a colonial state denied by settlers. Our historical and sociological surveys show that this lack of value is a denial of reality of the colonial situation, denying both injustice and emotional ties that had been created mainly between the settler children and servants. Hence the paradox of films called "domestic" is that domestics are absent. This lack is essential. Without nannies and boys, these films are a no man's land. Moreover, the colonial context creates a report view illegitimacy illegality of these films. In conclusion we propose firstly a cinematic reconstruction method that puts the heart of its system linked to the three actors amateur films: the filmmakers, the filmed people and those in the fields Out. Secondly we propose the creation of an institute of colonial amateur films based on principles established by an ethic of audiovisual archiving that allow former colonized to reclaim the images of their own past at a time when there was a monopoly of audiovisual means of production. This would respond to a memorial, audiovisual and emotional justice.

Submitted by Renata Lopes (renatasil82@gmail.com) on 2016-02-19T10:58:34Z No. of bitstreams: 1 diegoazevedoleite.pdf: 913531 bytes, checksum: 466952d4427ef1c64ec1fe3adf0d4604 (MD5) / Approved for entry into archive by Adriana Oliveira (adriana.oliveira@ufjf.edu.br) on 2016-02-26T13:45:03Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 diegoazevedoleite.pdf: 913531 bytes, checksum: 466952d4427ef1c64ec1fe3adf0d4604 (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2016-02-26T13:45:04Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 diegoazevedoleite.pdf: 913531 bytes, checksum: 466952d4427ef1c64ec1fe3adf0d4604 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2014-02-18 / CAPES - Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior / Muitas ideias de Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) a respeito da psicologia são ainda entendidas, em geral, de forma bastante incompleta ou com distorções e más interpretações na literatura secundária especializada, mas, principalmente, em manuais de história da psicologia. Um dos grandes problemas encontrados é a não consideração ou o exame superficial da relação existente entre a psicologia empírica e a antropologia pragmática. Por conta disso, há ainda muitos problemas interpretativos que permanecem sem uma solução apropriada. Um deles é a falta de clareza a respeito de uma afirmação feita por Kant, em sua obra de 1781, referente à relação entre a psicologia empírica e a antropologia. O presente trabalho tem o objetivo de compreender melhor tal afirmação e, além disso, através do exame detalhado da relação entre estes dois campos, apresentar de forma mais completa as concepções de Kant a respeito da psicologia. A tese geral defendida é a de que essa relação precisa ser considerada e examinada com profundidade para se compreender de forma adequada o que Kant realmente quis dizer na obra de 1781 e a amplitude de suas concepções sobre a psicologia. / Many ideas of Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) about psychology are still understood, generally, in a very incomplete way or with distortions and misinterpretations in the specialized secondary literature, but mainly in textbooks about history of psychology. A major problem encountered is that there is no consideration or just a superficial examination of the relationship between empirical psychology and pragmatic anthropology. Because of this, there are still many interpretative problems that remain without a proper solution. One of them is the lack of clarity regarding a statement made by Kant in his work of 1781, concerning the relationship between empirical psychology and anthropology. This study aims to better understand this statement and, moreover, through the detailed examination of the relationship between these two fields, to present more fully Kant’s conceptions about psychology. The general thesis defended is that this relationship needs to be considered and examined in depth for the adequate understanding of what Kant really meant in his work of 1781 and the range of his conceptions concerning psychology.