Habilitationsschrift--Philosophische Fakultät--Salzburg, 1975. / Notes bibliogr. Index.

Thesis (M.A.)--Indiana University, Dept. of Folklore and Ethnomusicology, 2007. / eContent provider-neutral record in process. Description based on print version record.

Diss.--Philosophische Fakultät I--Universität Zürich, 1998. / Bibliogr. p. 263-273. Index.

Akademisk avhandling--histoire des idées--Göteborg, 1989. / Résumé en anglais.

Habilitationsschrift--Salzburg, 1975. / Includes bibliographical references (p. 347-366) and index.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Chicago, Department of Political Science, 2001. / Includes bibliographical references. Also available on the Internet.

No description available.

No description available.

Ce n’est guère le mouvement jeune-hégélien qui vient immédiatement à l’espritlorsque sont évoqués les noms de Bakounine, d'Engels, de Marx ou même deStirner. Le premier et le dernier sont généralement associés à l’anarchisme,les deux autres, plus indubitablement encore, au marxisme. L'histoire de cespersonnages et le devenir de leurs œuvres n'ont pu que faire de l'ombre à leurappartenance commune et concomitante, trente ans avant que ne se cristallisentlesdits courants politiques, à ce qui a parfois été apparenté à une écolephilosophiqueLa présente thèse propose une lecture immanente, laquelle ne s'efforce pasmoins de restituer un contexte, des principaux écrits rédigés par ces auteursentre 1842 et 1843. La pensée de chacun d'entre eux est présentée dans sesinterrogations et ses enjeux propres, en s'intéressant aux emprunts et auxinnovations conceptuelles réalisées pour y répondre et tout en maintenantd’incessants aller-retours avec le champ problématique relatif au mouvementdans lequel elle prend corps et s’introduit.Il ne s'agit pas, par là, de procéder à une simple mise au point en matièred'histoire des idées. L'un des intérêts majeurs des textes abordés réside dansce qu'ils nous disent, dans une perspective post-hégélienne, de la philosophie.Les descriptions du présent que l'on trouve dans ces textes concordent, eneffet, quant à l'impossibilité d'établir l'unité du rationnel et de l'effectif.Tout reste encore à faire pour qui ne renonce pas à la réalisation de laliberté dans l'histoire. À suivre Hegel, pourtant, la philosophie doit secontenter de décrire ledit procès ou ses résultats. Doit-on se résoudre à ceque la philosophie ne puisse concourir à un destin dont elle a donné la clé ?N'est-il pas possible de la renouveler ? Et comment ? S'agit-il plutôt d'ensortir et d'imaginer d'autres formes d'intervention théoriques et pratiques ?Et qu'en est-il alors de ce qui reste de philosophique ? / The names of Bakunin, Engels, Marx, or Stirner are hardly ever associated withthe Young Hegelian movement. Bakunin and Stirner are generally associated withanarchism and Marx and Engels with marxism. Their lives and the fate of theirworks could do no more than obliterate the mutual and concomitant contributionsof these authors to what has sometimes been described as a philosophicalschool. This participation, in any case, occured thirty years before thecristallisation of the aforesaid political movements.This research proposes an immanent, and at the same time contextual, reading ofthe main texts written by these authors between 1842 and 1843. The theories ofeach of them are presented in accordance with their own questions and issues,focusing on the conceptual borrowings and innovations realised as aconsequence. They are expounded through a perpetual to and fro between theproblematic field related to the movement from which they were born and inwhich they participated.Nevertheless this study cannot be reduced to a mere contribution to the historyof ideas. One of the key interests of the analysed texts lies in what they tellus, from a post-hegelian perspective, about philosophy. When they describetheir epoch, they all conclude that there is no identity of the rational andthe real. There is still much to do for those who do not abandon the idea of therealisation of freedom in history. However, according to Hegel, philosophy canonly describe the process or the results of this realisation. Cannot philosophycontribute to the destiny it revealed? And if not, is it possible to renewphilosophy? How? Would an exit from philosophy be preferable? Other forms oftheoretical and practical intervention could be invented. But then, what aboutthe "philosophical" that remains?

Orientador: Alcides Hector Rodrigues Benoit / Dissertação (mestrado) - Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Instituto de Filosofia e Ciências Humanas / Made available in DSpace on 2018-08-03T19:24:17Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Antunes_Jair_M.pdf: 10201957 bytes, checksum: 681f739ca42494a3e12da67e963dec07 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2003 / Resumo: Marx faz referências à forma social asiática desde seus primeiros trabalhos. Refere-se, por exemplo, à forma despótica de governo, ao caráter "patriarcal" da escravidão e, principalmente, ao rígido sistema de castas que mantinha imutáveis as relações sociais na Ásia. Formulou, assim, a categoria de modo de produção asiático que, de modo geral, está na origem de todas as sociedades. Esta categoria permeou as teorias de Marx sobre a história da humanidade até sua morte. Engels, no entanto, não utiliza esta categoria em sua obra A Origem da Famz1ia, da Propriedade Privada e do Estado, caracterizando a Ásia como um continente que estaria ainda na comunidade primitiva. A ausência dessa categoria na obra do "último" Engels possibilitou a Stalin, por exemplo, não caracterizar a Rússia e a China, antes da revolução proletária em 1917, como "asiáticas", suprimindo o caráter imutável destas sociedades, inaugurando a era dos "estágios" na teoria marxista, dogmatizando a concepção de história de Marx / Abstract: Marx makes references to the Asian social form since his first works. He refers, for example, to the despotic form of govemment to the "patriarchal" character of slavery and, mainly, to the rigid system of castes which the social relations immutable m Asia. He formulated, thus, the category of the Asian way of production, which is, in general, in the origin of alI societies. This category permeated the theories of Marx about the history of mankind until his death. Engels, nevertheless, doesn't use it in this work The Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State, characterizing Asia as a continent that would still be in the primitive community. The absence of this category in the work of the "last" Engels made it possible for Stalin, for example, not to characterize Russia and China before the proletarian revolution in 1917, like "asiatics" and to suppress the immutable character of these societies initiatmg the era of the "stages" in the marxist theory, dogmatizing marxist conception of history / Mestrado / Filosofia / Mestre em Filosofia