No description available.

German text / Ausgehend von dem konkreten mehrdimensionalen missionalen Kirchenprojekt REFOmoabit ist es Ziel dieser Masterarbeit, eine Antwort auf die Frage zu geben, wie eine fruchtbare Integration von (1) gemeinschaftlichem Leben, (2) gesellschaftsrelevantem Gemeindebau und (3) Immobilienmanagement gelingen kann. Die aktuelle ekklesiologische Praxis und Erfahrung zeigt jedoch, dass es zu Spannungen zwischen dem Prinzip des gaben- und konsensbasierten Miteinanders, einerseits und der Entwicklung eines gesellschaftsrelevanten Gemeindebaus und einem die ersten beiden Bereiche unterstützenden Immobilienmanagements andererseits kommt. Infolgedessen soll im Rahmen dieser Arbeit die Frage nach der genauen Art und Ausprägung dieser Spannungen, ihren Ursachen und möglichen Lösungen, die eine wirklich fruchtbare Integration dieser drei Bereiche ermöglichen, untersucht und beantwortet werden. Dies erfolgt mit einem interdisziplinären Dreischritt, indem (a) soziologisch Art, Ausprägung und Ursache der vorfindlichen Spannungen analysiert werden, diese (b) theologisch reflektiert werden und abschließend (c) praktisch-theologische Handlungsmöglichkeiten als ekklesiologische Hilfestellungen für eine fruchtbare Integration entwickelt werden. / Based on the multidimensional church planting project REFOmoabit this dissertation aims to answer the question how a fruitful integration of (1) communal life, (2) societal relevant congregational development and (3) property estate management is possible. Current ecclesiological practice and experience has shown that tensions arise between the principle of gift- and consensus-based cooperation and transformative church planting as well as the real estate management that is supposed to support the other two areas. Therefore this dissertation aims to examine and answer questions about the exact nature and extent of these tensions, their causes and possible solutions that make a truly fruitful integration of these three areas possible. This takes place within an interdisciplinary approach by (a) analyzing the nature, extent and reason of the tensions sociologically, (b) examining them from a theological viewpoint and (c) offering practical theological courses of action as an ecclesiological aid for a fruitful integration. / Practical Theology / M. Th. (Practical Theology)

理性概念所具備的統一性特徵在傳統的形上學背景之下表現為一種普遍的統一學說，然而這樣的論點在當代受到很大的挑戰，當代思想中很多都表現為一種多元主義的立場，對於理性統一性的論點多有批判。於是乎一場一與多之間的哲學辯論就此展開。哈伯馬斯對於理性統一性有其獨特的見解，重新考慮在多元之中理性統一性的可能性。基本上哈伯馬斯採取跳脫形上學立場，不在一與多兩者間的對立為任何一方進行辯護，而是提出一種新的見解，由後形上學的立場來談在多元中理性統一性的可能性。 哈伯馬斯認為現今存在著兩類針鋒相對的觀點，一種是有鑑於當代形上學統一性的喪失而努力回歸前康德時代的形上學，另一種則是以被壓制的多元性向統一性思想提出抗議。為了要釐清其中有關一與多之間的對立與關聯，哈伯馬斯對於傳統以來一與多之間的論點提出了個人的見解，同時也對當代反對統一性的相關論點做討論，進而提出自己的看法以求一條新的解決之道，試著調和一與多之間的對立性。本論文將透過對後形上學思想趨勢的討論，說明哈伯馬斯重建理性概念的進路及其對不同立場的學者所抱持的態度。

<p>Anne Charlotte Leffler, Victoria Benedictsson and Frida Stéenhoff were all part of the Modern Breakthrough in Swedish literature. By utilizing Jürgen Habermas theoretical works on communicative action, and Nancy Fraser’s supplementary reading of his theory, this essay makes clear that the authors’ struggle for an understanding and a rethinking of social norms in their plays <em>Skådespelerskan </em>(1873), <em>Romeos Julia </em>(1888) and <em>Lejonets unge </em>(1896) can be read as a contribution to the public debate. Dialogue has a key function for female authors during the Modern Breakthrough. Women and mens’ possibilities to take part in conversation and argument as equals, requires the professional woman’s transgression and access to the privileges of both public (State) administration – “system”, and world of everyday life – “lifeworld”. As oppositional authors, Leffler, Benedictsson and Stéenhoff took advantage of the literary public domain, in this case the theatre. The theatre as public sphere had a more effective capacity to affect its audience than fiction. The plays were written and staged in a cultural period that, compared with the present one, in a greater sense influenced public opinion. The theatre was a powerful part of the public debate, and this debate involved parties from both on-stage and off-stage positions.</p><p>At the theatre Leffler, Benedictsson and Stéenhoff turned the private into politics. Their powerful contribution to the public debate were directed specifically towards the bourgeois audience. They carried on a controversy concerning the notion of the bourgeois family by showing scenarios that raised objection to its idealistic point of view. The bourgeois living room was exposed on stage. Conflicts related to the private sphere were brought up as a theme in a public sphere and by so means were incorporated into the public debate, which at that time was dominated by men. The plays mirrored the audience and the authors’ strategies were based upon the remodeling power inherent in conversation and argumentation. Thereby, the audience were confronted with an alternated reflection of themselves. This reflection should be read as a problematic representation of the writing of history. The alternate mirroring brought in itself forward an argument that emphasized why a new reflection was necessary.</p><p><em>Skådespelerskan</em>, <em>Romeos Julia </em>and <em>Lejonets unge</em> examine female artists in a bourgeois environment. Through the artist the structures that maintain bourgeois ideals are exposed and questioned, but first and foremost the artist show that communicative action between men and women was insufficient. The androcentric order did not acknowledge women and men as equals, in accordance with that, the possibility of conversation, in the sense of Habermas, came to nothing. Under such circumstances an understanding between men and women could not be reached. Love within the institution of marriage also suffered since it could not be founded in acknowledgement as long as the structure maintained. Saga and Adil, the main characters in <em>Lejonets unge</em>, personify, on the other hand, Stéenhoffs ideas of what is being needed to change the androcentric structure. They are citizens of the future.</p><p>My focus is on human action (in an Aristotelian sense) in the plays, the way characters stage themselves and bring the plot forward, shed light upon their possibilities and limitations in proportion to each other as men and women. My analysis thereby contrasts with the greater part of earlier research. I give prominence to the connection between psychological conflict and social position/role. In <em>Skådespelerskan</em>, <em>Romeos Julia</em> and <em>Lejonets unge</em> all of the characters’ psychological conflicts are based in gender issues, the consequences of being a man or woman in the 18th century, rather than explicit existential matters.</p>

Anne Charlotte Leffler, Victoria Benedictsson and Frida Stéenhoff were all part of the Modern Breakthrough in Swedish literature. By utilizing Jürgen Habermas theoretical works on communicative action, and Nancy Fraser’s supplementary reading of his theory, this essay makes clear that the authors’ struggle for an understanding and a rethinking of social norms in their plays Skådespelerskan (1873), Romeos Julia (1888) and Lejonets unge (1896) can be read as a contribution to the public debate. Dialogue has a key function for female authors during the Modern Breakthrough. Women and mens’ possibilities to take part in conversation and argument as equals, requires the professional woman’s transgression and access to the privileges of both public (State) administration – “system”, and world of everyday life – “lifeworld”. As oppositional authors, Leffler, Benedictsson and Stéenhoff took advantage of the literary public domain, in this case the theatre. The theatre as public sphere had a more effective capacity to affect its audience than fiction. The plays were written and staged in a cultural period that, compared with the present one, in a greater sense influenced public opinion. The theatre was a powerful part of the public debate, and this debate involved parties from both on-stage and off-stage positions. At the theatre Leffler, Benedictsson and Stéenhoff turned the private into politics. Their powerful contribution to the public debate were directed specifically towards the bourgeois audience. They carried on a controversy concerning the notion of the bourgeois family by showing scenarios that raised objection to its idealistic point of view. The bourgeois living room was exposed on stage. Conflicts related to the private sphere were brought up as a theme in a public sphere and by so means were incorporated into the public debate, which at that time was dominated by men. The plays mirrored the audience and the authors’ strategies were based upon the remodeling power inherent in conversation and argumentation. Thereby, the audience were confronted with an alternated reflection of themselves. This reflection should be read as a problematic representation of the writing of history. The alternate mirroring brought in itself forward an argument that emphasized why a new reflection was necessary. Skådespelerskan, Romeos Julia and Lejonets unge examine female artists in a bourgeois environment. Through the artist the structures that maintain bourgeois ideals are exposed and questioned, but first and foremost the artist show that communicative action between men and women was insufficient. The androcentric order did not acknowledge women and men as equals, in accordance with that, the possibility of conversation, in the sense of Habermas, came to nothing. Under such circumstances an understanding between men and women could not be reached. Love within the institution of marriage also suffered since it could not be founded in acknowledgement as long as the structure maintained. Saga and Adil, the main characters in Lejonets unge, personify, on the other hand, Stéenhoffs ideas of what is being needed to change the androcentric structure. They are citizens of the future. My focus is on human action (in an Aristotelian sense) in the plays, the way characters stage themselves and bring the plot forward, shed light upon their possibilities and limitations in proportion to each other as men and women. My analysis thereby contrasts with the greater part of earlier research. I give prominence to the connection between psychological conflict and social position/role. In Skådespelerskan, Romeos Julia and Lejonets unge all of the characters’ psychological conflicts are based in gender issues, the consequences of being a man or woman in the 18th century, rather than explicit existential matters.

German text / Ausgehend von dem konkreten mehrdimensionalen missionalen Kirchenprojekt REFOmoabit ist es Ziel dieser Masterarbeit, eine Antwort auf die Frage zu geben, wie eine fruchtbare Integration von (1) gemeinschaftlichem Leben, (2) gesellschaftsrelevantem Gemeindebau und (3) Immobilienmanagement gelingen kann. Die aktuelle ekklesiologische Praxis und Erfahrung zeigt jedoch, dass es zu Spannungen zwischen dem Prinzip des gaben- und konsensbasierten Miteinanders, einerseits und der Entwicklung eines gesellschaftsrelevanten Gemeindebaus und einem die ersten beiden Bereiche unterstützenden Immobilienmanagements andererseits kommt. Infolgedessen soll im Rahmen dieser Arbeit die Frage nach der genauen Art und Ausprägung dieser Spannungen, ihren Ursachen und möglichen Lösungen, die eine wirklich fruchtbare Integration dieser drei Bereiche ermöglichen, untersucht und beantwortet werden. Dies erfolgt mit einem interdisziplinären Dreischritt, indem (a) soziologisch Art, Ausprägung und Ursache der vorfindlichen Spannungen analysiert werden, diese (b) theologisch reflektiert werden und abschließend (c) praktisch-theologische Handlungsmöglichkeiten als ekklesiologische Hilfestellungen für eine fruchtbare Integration entwickelt werden. / Based on the multidimensional church planting project REFOmoabit this dissertation aims to answer the question how a fruitful integration of (1) communal life, (2) societal relevant congregational development and (3) property estate management is possible. Current ecclesiological practice and experience has shown that tensions arise between the principle of gift- and consensus-based cooperation and transformative church planting as well as the real estate management that is supposed to support the other two areas. Therefore this dissertation aims to examine and answer questions about the exact nature and extent of these tensions, their causes and possible solutions that make a truly fruitful integration of these three areas possible. This takes place within an interdisciplinary approach by (a) analyzing the nature, extent and reason of the tensions sociologically, (b) examining them from a theological viewpoint and (c) offering practical theological courses of action as an ecclesiological aid for a fruitful integration. / Philosophy, Practical and Systematic Theology / M. Th. (Practical Theology)

Made available in DSpace on 2017-07-10T18:26:19Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Joel Cezar Bonin.pdf: 1028514 bytes, checksum: c126bc1a253eb207fa298b746a9eff65 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2008-06-30 / This study aimed to examine the works of Michel Foucault and Jürgen Habermas, the views that each author has, on contemporary ethics. The two thinkers have points of reference and thought very different. Foucault addresses through the History of Sexuality and how a person can be as thinkers and protagonists of an ethics focused on subjectivity, directed to a personal care of themselves. His texts refer to greek life and the possibility of a life guided by an aesthetic of existence, where universal precepts don t have chance. Habermas, however, part of a different paradigm and almost antagonistic. He believes that the living world was colonised and was alienated by a systemic world, where money and the State are their most expressive bulwarks. The output for this colonization is, to Habermas, the communicative action, which by means of language, the person interact and seek through the use of rationality argumentative, the consensus. This exercise is rational, according Habermas, the most appropriated option for the balance between objectivity and subjectivity of the human beings in the world. Indeed, communication is an intersubjective action, which takes into account the inclusion of other, the acceptance of the argumentation of others and the intent of the search for harmonization between the private and public sphere. The problem of Habermas lies in his desire to make the communicative action a universal action, valid for all. Habermas, therefore, develop an ethical theory that regards any act of speech has a claim to validity. The act of saying has an intention, a purpose. If this act of speech is valid or not, will depend on the analysis of the community in which the man is posed to discuss, it will depend on the strength of the argument and the acquiescence of the better argument. This act of putting under discussion is what will validate or not the argument. According Habermas, what matters is that this discussion should be free from coercion or domination. Something that Foucault understand how impossible, as every speech itself has power. It is not something that can be discarded or forgotten. In other words, according Foucault, the speech itself is power, whoever speaks. With this, we can see that Habermas and Foucault have very different points of view on what it means to be ethical. This work, in the end, shows that Foucault attempts to show that taking care of themselves is a free opportunity to be ethical, where through personal techniques, the subject search to know and meet themselves, with their bodies and their sexuality as a focus of this process. / Este trabalho teve por objetivo analisar nas obras de Michel Foucault e Jürgen Habermas, os pontos de vista que cada autor tem, sobre a ética contemporânea. Os dois pensadores possuem pontos de referência e de pensamento bastante divergentes. Foucault aborda através da História da Sexualidade como que os sujeitos podem se constituir como pensadores e protagonistas de uma ética voltada para a subjetividade, direcionada para um cuidado pessoal de si. Seus textos nos remetem à vida grega e à possibilidade de uma vida pautada em uma estética da existência, onde preceitos universais não têm vez. Habermas, em contrapartida, parte de um paradigma diverso e praticamente antagônico. Ele acredita que o mundo vivido foi colonizado e instrumentalizado por um mundo sistêmico, onde o dinheiro e o Estado são seus baluartes mais expressivos. A saída que Habermas encontra para esta colonização é o agir comunicativo, onde por meio da linguagem, os sujeitos interagem e buscam através do uso da racionalidade argumentativa, o consenso. Este exercício racional é, segundo Habermas, a possibilidade mais adequada para o equilíbrio entre a subjetividade e a objetividade dos sujeitos que vivem no mundo. No fundo, a comunicação é uma ação intersubjetiva, que leva em conta, a inclusão do outro, a aceitação dos argumentos alheios e a intencionalidade da busca de harmonização entre a esfera privada e a esfera pública. O problema de Habermas reside em sua pretensão de tornar a ação comunicativa uma ação universal, válida para todos. Habermas, para isso, desenvolve uma teoria ética que considera que todo ato de fala possui uma pretensão de validade. O ato de dizer possui uma intenção, uma finalidade. Se esse ato de fala será válido ou não, dependerá da análise da comunidade na qual o sujeito se põe a discutir, dependerá da força argumentativa e da aquiescência ao melhor argumento. Esse ato de pôr em discussão é que validará ou não o argumento. Segundo Habermas, o que importa também é que esta discussão deve ser isenta de coação ou dominação. Algo que Foucault compreende como impossível, pois todo discurso possui em si poder. Não é algo que pode ser descartado ou esquecido. Ou seja, segundo Foucault, o próprio discurso é poder, independentemente de quem discursa. Com isso, podemos ver que Habermas e Foucault possuem pontos de vista bastante diversos sobre o que significa ser ético. Este trabalho, ao final, apresenta que Foucault tenta demonstrar que o cuidado de si é uma possibilidade livre de ser ético, onde através de técnicas pessoais, o sujeito busca encontrar-se e descobrir-se, tendo seu corpo e sua sexualidade como foco deste processo.

[pt] Com a modernidade em crise, a crítica aos ideais iluministas e até da noção tradicional da razão em cheque, passou-se a buscar uma melhor compreensão da realidade, como alternativa para suprir um crescente descontentamento social em função do distanciamento entre as decisões administrativas, incluindo as judiciais, e os efetivos anseios dos cidadãos. Dentre as propostas que aliam o novo ideal democrático ao contexto do mundo da vida, o filósofo alemão Jürgen Habermas propõe uma mudança de paradigma da Razão através de uma lógica dialógica, transferindo a noção da Razão Prática para um espectro procedimental, usando como ferramenta indispensável o agir comunicativo, o discurso e o consenso entre as partes interessadas; além disso, promove uma reconstrução do direito e do Estado, com a superação dos modelos teóricos existentes – liberal e republicano – e com a formatação de um Estado efetivamente democrático, posto que viabiliza a participação dos concernidos na criação dos direitos. Em outras palavras, Habermas aposta no sucesso processo de interação comunicativa, que se efetiva por meio de um acordo discutido, debatido e refletido em função dos motivos apresentados pelos interessados. Diante dessa linha habermasiana que envolve a atuação efetiva dos cidadãos e das instituições da sociedade civil, além do próprio Estado, no processo de formulação normativa e decisória surge, para alguns, a ideia da inaplicabilidade dessa teoria por entenderem que, em função da realidade brasileira, principalmente em relação ao déficit educacional da população, essa ideia ficaria prejudicada. O Direito Coletivo do Trabalho, como ramificação de nosso sistema jurídico, promove a derrocada dessa premissa de inaplicabilidade da proposta de Habermas que adota o agir comunicativo como instrumento para alcance do entendimento, do consenso dos interessados, promovendo, assim, uma harmônica relação entre a validade e faticidade da norma. Importante ainda ressaltar a convivência dos interesses individuais e dos coletivos, não havendo prevalência da simples vontade da maioria, mas sim da vontade melhor justificada dentro do processo dialógico, ocorrendo a preservação das garantias e direitos individuais fundamentais. / [en] With modernity in crisis, criticizes the Enlightenment ideals and even the traditional notion of reason in check, began to seek a better understanding of reality, as an alternative to supply a growing social discontent due to the distance between the adminstrative decisions, including judicial, and actual desires of citizens. Among the proposals that combine the new democratic ideal context of the living world, the German philosopher Jurgen Habermas proposes a paradigm shift of Reason through a dialogical logic, transferring the notion of Practical Reason for a procedural spectrum, using as the indispensable tool communicative action, discourse and consensus among stakeholders; Moreover, it promotes a reconstruction of law and state, with the overcoming of the existing theoretical models - liberal and republican - and the formatting of a democratic state effectively, since it enables the participation of concerned in the creation of rights. In other words, Habermas betting on the success of the process, which is effective communicative interaction through an agreement discussed, debated and reflected on the basis of the reasons given by those concerned. Given this Habermasian line that involves the effective participation of citizens and civil society institutions, and the state itself, the formulation of rules and decision-making process arises, for some, the idea of this theory inapplicable because they understand that, according to the Brazilian reality mainly in relation to the educational deficit of the population, this idea would be impaired. The Collective Labour Law, as a branch of our legal system, promotes the overthrow of this premise inapplicability of proposed which adopts Habermas communicative action as an instrument to reach understanding, consensus of stakeholders, thus promoting a harmonious relationship between the validity and facticity of the norm. Important to highlight the coexistence of individual and collective interests, with no prevalence of simple will of the majority, but the best justified within the dialogical process will occur and guarantees the preservation of fundamental individual rights.

No description available.

[pt] A partir da metáfora que sugere a figura híbrida do magistrado-mediador para dar nome ao recente – e crescente – movimento em que magistrados atuam diretamente em procedimentos autocompositivos enquanto mediadores e conciliadores, busca-se estudar a pertinência ou a impertinência dessa realidade e, para tanto, submete-se essa figura híbrida a três esferas de influência, com o objetivo de analisar as reações de compatibilidade: a esfera do próprio microssistema da autocomposição, a esfera da autonomia das partes que medeiam e a esfera do próprio magistrado que, após a sua atuação em autocomposição, terá que atuar em heterecomposição. Como percurso de investigação da (im)pertinência, o trabalho propõe três estágios de análise e o faz por meio do esquema realidade>>espelho<<simbólico, no qual a realidade representaria esse nosso lado do espelho, o mundo real do trabalho, da técnica, das leis, estruturas e sistemas, já o simbólico representaria o reflexo daquele lado do espelho, ou seja, as fontes mitológicas, simbólicas e literárias que formam o senso comum da figura do magistrado e, por fim, apresenta-se o próprio espelho como função de interpretação metodológica, na qual os referenciais teóricos de Habermas – juridificação e pressupostos da ação comunicativa - e Warat – noção de senso comum, influência e o peso do simbolismo jurídico e o estudo transdisciplinar da mediação como ferramenta emancipadora – desenvolvem o raciocínio que irá ajudar a construir as respostas sobre a (im)pertinência do magistrado-mediador nas ditas três esferas de influência. / [en] From the metaphor that suggests the hybrid figure of the judge-mediator to name the recent – and growing – movement in which judges act directly in selfcompositional procedures as mediators and conciliators, we begin to study the pertinence or impertinence of this reality and, for that, the hybrid figure is submitted to three spheres of influence, with the objective of analyzing the compatibility reactions: the sphere of the microsystem of self-composition, the sphere of autonomy of the parties that mediate and the sphere of the judge himself. that, after acting in self-composition, will have to act in heterocomposition. As a way of investigating (im)pertinence, the work proposes three stages of analysis and does so through the following scheme: reality>>mirror<<symbolic, through which reality represents our side of the mirror, the real world of work, technique, laws, structures and systems; the symbolic represents the reflection on that side of the mirror, that is, the mythological, symbolic and literary sources that form the common sense of the figure of the judge and, finally, the mirror is presented as a methodological interpretation function, through which the theoretical references of Habermas – juridification and presuppositions of communicative action - and Warat – concept of common sense, influence and the relevance of legal symbolism and the transdisciplinary study of mediation as an emancipating tool – develop the reasoning that will help to build the answers about the (im) pertinence of the judgemediator in the said three spheres of influence.