In dieser Arbeit schlage ich eine phänomenalistische Interpretation von Kants Idealismus vor, die sich jedoch in einigen Punkten von Standard-phänomenalistischen Interpretationen unterscheidet. Erscheinungen sind in meiner Lesart der Inhalt von Vorstellungen, aber nicht das eigentliche Objekt der Erkenntnis. Denn Erscheinungen sind von den erscheinenden Objekten verschieden. Diese sind vielmehr die Dinge an sich, welche wir zum transzendentalen Gegenstand der Erkenntnis machen. Allerdings erkennen wir sie lediglich, wie sie erscheinen, und nicht, wie sie sind. Somit bleibt die Unerkennbarkeit der Dinge, wie sie an sich sind, gewahrt. Im Verlauf meiner Argumentation diskutiere ich zahlreiche Aspekte von Kants Philosophie. Darunter sind die Unterscheidung zwischen Erscheinungen und Dingen an sich, Kants Verhältnis zur Cartesischen Epistemologie, die Widerlegung des Idealismus, sowie nicht zuletzt seine Theorie der Synthesis zu nennen. Mein Ziel ist dabei nicht nur zu zeigen, dass Kant ein Phänomenalist ist, sondern auch die Art seines Phänomenalismus zu charakterisieren. / This publication defends a phenomenalist interpretation of Kant’s idealism, which, however, deviates from usual phenomenalist interpretations in several respects. According to my reading, appearances are the content of representations, but not the true object of cognition. The object to which our cognition refers is rather the thing itself as the transcendental object. Nonetheless, we only cognize them as they appear and not as they are in themselves. Thus the unknowability of things as they are in themselves is retained. In the course of my presentation, I discuss a number of aspects of Kant’s philosophy, among which are the distinction between appearances and things in themselves, Kant’s relationship to Cartesian epistemology, the refutation of idealism, and not least his theory of synthesis. My aim is not only to show that Kant is a phenomenalist, but also to characterize the kind of his phenomenalism.

Com a finalidade de propor uma abordagem filosófica em torno de diversos problemas atuais da estética musical, em especial buscando identificar e situar uma crise existente na sua elaboração disciplinar, serão lançados nesta tese estudos sobre a problemática relação da estética com outros campos do conhecimento, tanto aqueles vinculados às ciências empírico-matemáticas quanto às ciências humanas. Questões centrais sobre a relação entre as artes e a filosofia, sobre o papel e a situação do esteta moderno, e sobre as tendências da composição musical contemporânea também serão abordadas, sempre no intuito de apresentar possibilidades epistemológicas para uma nova estética musical que sejam consubstanciais aos problemas das artes e da música contemporânea, bem como elementos para definições de arte e da música que sejam alternativas à histórica pregnância na modernidade do pensamento de vanguarda. Para tanto, esta tese se divide em quatro grandes ensaios, pretendendo-se que possam ser tomados, para além de sua unidade temática e estrutural, também isoladamente. / In this dissertation, studies about the problematic relationship of aesthetics with other fields of knowledge, as those bound to empirical-mathematical sciences as well to human sciences, will be launched with the goal of proposing a philosophical approach around various current musical aesthetics problems, specially aiming to identify and to situate an existent crisis in its disciplinary elaboration. Main questions about the relation among arts and philosophy, about the role and situation of the modern aesthete, and about trends of contemporary musical composition will be broached as well, always intending to present epistemológical possibilities to a new musical aesthetics that are consubstantial to the problems of arts and contemporary music, as well as elements for definitions of art and music which may be alternative to historical impression of modernity on avant-garde thinking. Therefore, this dissertation is divided in four great essays, with the intention that they may be taken, over and above its thematic and structural unit, also separately.

Submitted by Filipe dos Santos (fsantos@pucsp.br) on 2017-10-03T12:32:07Z No. of bitstreams: 1 Luis Sergio Vieira Conterato.pdf: 965280 bytes, checksum: 37b80ad428bfaee27fb8e31e9545665e (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2017-10-03T12:32:07Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Luis Sergio Vieira Conterato.pdf: 965280 bytes, checksum: 37b80ad428bfaee27fb8e31e9545665e (MD5) Previous issue date: 2017-09-18 / Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior - CAPES / This dissertation aims to study the concept of thing in itself in the Critique of Pure Reason and the origins of the controversy that surrounds it. In the light of this scope, this work was elaborated and articulated in three chapters whose purpose was to point out the origins of the controversy that involves the concept of thing itself, the main objectors and their respective objections to the thing itself. Given these questions to the thing itself, we’ve approached Allison's proposal to defend a non-polemical use of the concept of thing itself, from the understanding that the distinction phenomena and thing itself are two ways of considering the same thing. Next, it deals with the construction of the concept of thing itself within the Critique of Pure Reason, addressing the implications of texts of the Preface, Transcendental Aesthetics, Analytic Concepts and Analytic of the Principles for the consolidation of the meaning of the thing considered in itself it. In this sense, the differences between the thing itself, phenomenon, transcendental object and noumenon, and especially in what sense some of these concepts can be used as equivalents in the light of the Critique of Pure Reason, stand out. Finally, the importance of the concept of thing itself in Transcendental Idealism was analyzed, since the criticisms were incisive, but Kant remained with the concept of thing itself in his Theory of Knowledge. Thus, the task of the concept of thing itself in Transcendental Idealism was observed, which led to the conclusion that the thing considered in itself, in spite of the controversies surrounding it, is essential for the success of Kant's critical program, named as Transcendental Idealism whose thesis is the access to the objects of the senses, since these depend on the pure forms of sensibility and the impossibility of the cognoscent subject to scan things considered in themselves, since their existence does not depend on the human faculty of knowledge / Essa dissertação tem como objetivo estudar o conceito de coisa em si na Crítica da Razão Pura e as origens da polêmica que o envolve. À luz desse escopo, o trabalho foi elaborado e articulado em três capítulos, cujo propósito foi de apontar as origens da polêmica que envolve o conceito de coisa em si, os principais objetores e seus respectivos questionamentos à coisa em si. Dado estes questionamentos à coisa em si, abordou-se a proposta de Allison em defender um uso não polêmico do conceito de coisa em si, a partir da compreensão que a distinção fenômeno e coisa em si são dois modos de considerar a mesma coisa. Em seguida, trata-se da construção do conceito de coisa em si no interior da Crítica da Razão Pura, abordando as implicações de textos do “Prefácio”; “Estética Transcendental”; “Analítica dos Conceitos” e “Analítica dos Princípios” para a consolidação do significado da coisa considerada em si mesma. Nesse sentido, destacam-se as diferenças entre coisa em si, fenômeno, objeto transcendental e númeno e, especialmente, em que sentido alguns desses conceitos podem ser utilizados como equivalentes à luz da Crítica da Razão Pura. Por fim, analisou-se a importância do conceito de coisa em si no Idealismo Transcendental, visto que as críticas foram incisivas, mas Kant permaneceu com esse conceito em sua Teoria do Conhecimento. Sendo assim, observou-se a tarefa do conceito de coisa em si no Idealismo Transcendental o que conduziu à conclusão de que a coisa considerada em si mesma, a despeito das polêmicas que a envolve, é imprescindível para o êxito do programa crítico de Kant, nomeado como Idealismo Transcendental cuja tese é o acesso aos objetos dos sentidos, pois estes dependem das formas puras da sensibilidade e a impossibilidade do sujeito cognoscente esquadrinhar as coisas consideradas em si mesmas, porque o modo de existir dessas não dependem da faculdade humana de conhecimento

L'objectif de cette thèse est d'interroger la manière dont Hegel conçoit la fondation absolue de la philosophie, c'est-à-dire la manière dont la philosophie fournit, à l'intérieur d'elle-même, la justification intégrale de la vérité absolue de son discours, justification qui, d'après Hegel, la caractérise en propre. Pour ce faire, après avoir brièvement replacé, à titre introductif, cette tentative hégélienne dans le cadre de la problématique de la fondation de la philosophie propre à la philosophie post-kantienne, nous étudions d'abord la manière dont Hegel rend compte de la genèse historique de l'exigence d'une auto-fondation absolue de la philosophie dans ses Leçons sur l'histoire de la philosophie, qui s'avèrent un espace hybride de position des problèmes philosophiques, à la fois historiquement donnés et toujours déjà philosophiquement construits. Nous interrogeons ensuite, à partir de la Doctrine de l'essence, le concept logique de fondement (Grund) dans ses tensions propres, pour montrer qu'il dégage l'espace des problèmes posés par la notion de fondation sans pouvoir leur apporter par lui-même une solution définitive : cette dernière nous paraît bien plutôt énoncée dans la Doctrine du concept, dont le mouvement d'ensemble (concept subjectif, objectivité, idée) fait l'objet d'une lecture permettant d'y faire ressortir à la fois l'Aufhebung interne du fondement et l'émergence de la notion d'auto-fondation, qui apparaît in fine dans la définition de l'idée comme processus de « développement progressif » et « fondation régressive » de soi. La fondation est alors définie comme un processus consistant à rendre raison de soi dans ses manifestations, ce que nous interprétons comme rupture avec le concept de fondement hérité de la métaphysique d'entendement, dont la logique hégélienne produit l'Aufhebung. L'idée ayant été ainsi définie, de manière formelle, comme processus de rendre raison de soi, nous étudions, dans une troisième partie, la manière dont la philosophie de la nature et la philosophie de l'esprit concourent au processus d'auto-fondation réelle de l'idée, c'est-à-dire, en dernière instance, à son effectuation comme esprit absolu ; à cette occasion, nous étudions plusieurs occurrences significatives de la notion de fondement dans la Realphilosophie, ainsi que le rapport du discours philosophique aux réalités dont il traite (rapport que Hegel nous semble prendre soin de distinguer d'une justification extérieure). Une quatrième partie vient alors étudier la manière dont la philosophie se pense elle-même comme fondation systématique de sa propre vérité : on soulève la question de savoir si le système a besoin d'un fondement externe pour garantir sa vérité (fondement que certains interprètes ont pu trouver dans la Phénoménologie de l'esprit ou dans l'histoire de la philosophie), et on étudie les syllogismes finaux de l'Encyclopédie pour y lire une réflexion de la philosophie sur sa propre fondation systématique. La thèse que nous soutenons au terme de ce parcours est que le profond remaniement spéculatif du concept de fondement qui aboutit à l'idée d'une autofondation au sens de « rendre raison de soi » (en rupture donc avec tout principe ou fondement réel ou formel tel qu'on en rencontre dans l'histoire de la philosophie), converge avec une redéfinition de la philosophie comme savoir rendant absolument raison de sa propre vérité, et même, au sens strict, ne fondant que sa propre vérité comme système, ce qui lui permet en même temps de libérer le sens vrai des objets qu'il parcourt et ordonne dans son déploiement systématique. / This thesis aims at questioning the way Hegel conceives the absolute foundation of philosophy, that is to say the way philosophy provides, within itself, the integral justification of its discourse's absolute truth, which, according to Hegel, characterizes it in specific. To do so, after sketching the historical frame of Post-Kantian debates about the foundation of philosophy, we first study the way Hegel relates, in his Lectures on the History of Philosophy, the historical genesis of the requirement of an absolute self-foundation of philosophy. We then question the logical concept of Grund within the Doctrine of Essence in order to show, that neither it or its subsequent specifications (e.g. cause) suffice to give an account of the process of foundation, whose truth we take to be stated instead in the Doctrine of the Concept ; we study Begriffslogik's overall movement (subjective concept, objectivity, idea) in order to bring out the notion of self-foundation (Selbstbegründung), which appears in fine in the definition of Idea as a process of “progressive development” and “regressive foundation” of itself. Foundation is thus defined as a process consisting in the justification of itself in its own moments, which we take to be a split from metaphysics' concept of foundation, of which the Hegelian Logic carries out the Aufhebung. In a third part, we try to study the way philosophy of nature and philosophy of spirit contribute to the process of a real self-foundation of the Idea, that is to say its realization as Absolute Spirit ; on that occasion, we study multiple occurrences of “foundation” in the Realphilosophie, and also the connection between philosophical discourse and the realities it deals with, which Hegel seems to distinguish from an external justification. The fourth part then studies the way philosophy thinks itself as systematical foundation of its own truth : we raise the question of knowing if the system needs an external foundation to guarantee its truth (which could be provided by the Phenomenology of Spirit or the history of philosophy), and we read the “syllogisms of philosophy” as philosophy looking back at its own foundation. The thesis we support at the end of this demonstration is that the profound speculative reshuffle of the concept of foundation that leads to the idea of a self-foundation within the meaning of “justifying itself” (breaking thus with every real or formal principle or foundation as we know them in the history of philosophy), converges with a redefinition of philosophy as knowledge justifying its own truth in an absolute manner, and even, in a precise meaning, founding only its own truth as a system, which allows it meanwhile to free the true meaning of the objects that it browses and orders in its systematical deployment.

Este estudo pretende expor os fundamentos filosóficos e os conceitos políticos e sociais de um dos textos mais incompreendidos de Marx, a Crítica da Filosofia do Direito de Hegel. No capítulo I, iremos expor o estudo de dois grandes filósofos do século XX, Lukács e Althusser, nos quais são apresentadas posições opostas quanto ao nosso objeto. No segundo capítulo, trataremos do contexto real e ideológico do surgimento da Crítica de 1843, e demonstraremos a proximidade e o distanciamento de Marx tanto em relação a Hegel quanto à Feuerbach. No capítulo III, demostraremos que, ao lado dos fundamentos materialistas, da crítica aos universais especulativos da filosofia hegeliana e da crítica à inversão entre Estado e sociedade civil nessa filosofia - para Marx, a sociedade civil é o sujeito do Estado, em oposição a Hegel - há uma concepção da práxis social idealista, uma dialética da evolução da consciência popular, que fundamenta a resolução das contradições da sociedade moderna proposta por Marx, a \"verdadeira democracia\". Como a sociedade civil corresponde à essa práxis, não poderíamos estar diante de seu conceito marxista. Não há o conceito de classes marxista na Crítica de 1843. Há, por outro lado, uma concepção atomística da sociedade civil. Tampouco poderia haver o conceito marxista de Estado: aqui, é o Estado real - não o Estado moderno, existente - identificado à universalidade. O que não há na Crítica é a concepção da atividade material que é o núcleo do marxismo. Por fim, concluímos tratar a Crítica de 1843 de um texto de transição, o que nos remete a uma concepção do desenvolvimento intelectual marcada por continuidades e descontinuidades, essas, entretanto, determinadas pelas continuidades e descontinuidades do próprio desenvolvimento histórico real. / This study aims to expose the philosophical foundations and political and social concepts of one of Marx\'s most misunderstood texts, the Critique of Hegel\'s Philosophy of Right. In chapter I, we present the study of two great twentieth-century philosophers, Lukács and Althusser, which have opposing views regarding our object. In the second chapter, we deal with the real and ideological context of the emergence of the Critique of 1843, and we demonstrate the proximity and the distance of Marx from Hegel and Feuerbach. In chapter III, we demonstrate that alongside materialist foundations, criticism of the speculative universal of Hegelian philosophy, and, criticism of the inversion between state and civil society in this philosophy - for Marx, opposed to Hegel, civil society is the subject of the state - there is a conception of idealistic social praxis, a dialectic of the evolution of popular consciousness, which underlies the resolution of the contradiction of modern society proposed by Marx, the \"true democracy.\" It does not arise because of the material movement, of the class struggle, but as a product of the dialectic referred before, although it represents, in front of the young Hegelians, an advance: the \"true democracy\" is the defense of a real revolution, that overthrow the modern state and civil society. As civil society corresponds to this praxis, we could not be in the face of its Marxist concept. There is no concept of Marxist classes in the Critique of 1843. There is, on the other hand, an atomistic conception of civil society. Nor could there be the Marxist concept of State: here, it is the real state - not the modern, existing state - identified with universality. What is not in Criticism is the conception of material activity that is the core of Marxism. Finally, we conclude that the Critique of 1843 is a transitional text, which leads us to a conception of intellectual development marked by continuities and discontinuities, which, however, are determined by the continuities and discontinuities of actual historical development.

The notion of the organism has a somewhat ambiguous status in Kant’s philosophy. On the one hand it belongs to natural science, on the other hand it is based on an analogy with the structure of reason. Biology therefore has a peculiar place among the sciences according to Kant: it is a natural science constituted by the use of a regulative maxim. The present study places Kant’s views on biological teleology in the larger context of transcendental idealism. It consists of five essays. The first one treats the notions of things in themselves and appearances, arguing for an interpretation in terms of two aspects or perspectives rather than two worlds. The importance of the discursivity of our cognitive capacity is stressed, as well as the need to separate Kant’s various reflective perspectives. In the second essay this interpretation is applied to the third section of the Groundwork, arguing that this text does not belong to theoretical metaphysics, but rather to the articulation of a specifically practical perspective. The third essay discusses similarities and differences between Kant’s a priori conditions for cognition and conceptions of innate ideas in the rationalist tradition. Kant’s comparison of the system of categories with the biological theory of epigenesis is considered in connection to eighteenth century theories of generation. The comparison is viewed as an analogy rather than as a naturalistic theory of the a priori. In the fourth essay Kant’s account of functional attribution in biology is explicated in the context of the present day debate of the issue. It is claimed that Kant’s neo-Aristotelian approach avoids some of the difficulties in the dominant naturalistic accounts of today. Kant’s view differs from the Aristotelian in that it involves a distinction of levels, making it possible to take functional attributions on the one hand as objective from the standpoint of biology but on the other hand as having a merely regulative status from a philosophical point of view. In the fifth essay an interpretation of the antinomy of teleological judgment in the Critique of Judgment is offered. The antinomy is taken to consist in the dialectical tendency to treat the regulative maxims of teleology and mechanism as constitutive principles. The difference between the discursivity of the human understanding and the idea of a non-discursive understanding, an important theme in Kant’s solution of the antinomy, puts the question of biological teleology in relation to central tenets of transcendental idealism.

Εντός ενός εκτεταμένου φάσματος τόπων και χρόνων της ανθρώπινης διανόησης, τόσο ο ορισμός όσο και η επίλυση του προβλήματος του σχετικού με το κακό θα αναζητούνται διακαώς και αδιαλείπτως. Τα πλέον κεντροβαρή θέματα, τα οποία θα αποτελέσουν τα κλειδιά για τη διάνοιξη μίας ικανοποιητικής κατανόησης σχετικά με το διαχρονικό ρίζωμα του κακού εντός της κοσμικής ολότητας, επιβάλλουν τη διερεύνηση της σχέσης της ύψιστης οντότητας με αυτό, όπως και της πεπερασμένης έλλογης οντότητας με την ελευθερία της, έστω και εάν η ελευθερία αυτή αποδειχθεί εντέλει δυνητική, ενδεχομένως ανύπαρκτη. Επικεντρωμένη στα κορυφαία έργα: Essais de Théodicée sur la Bonté de Dieu, la Liberté de l'Homme et l'Origine du Mal (Δοκίμια Θεοδικίας για την Καλοσύνη του Θεού, την Ελευθερία του Ανθρώπου και την Καταγωγή του Κακού) (1710) του Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz [Λάιμπνιτς, 1646‒1716] και Philosophische Untersuchungen Über das Wesen der Menschlichen Freiheit und die Damit Zusammenhängenden Gegenstände (Φιλοσοφικές Έρευνες για την Ουσία της Ανθρώπινης Ελευθερίας και Περί Συναφών Θεμάτων) (1809) του Friedrich Wilhelm Joseph Schelling [Σέλλινγκ, 1775–1854], στα πλαίσια της κοσμοθεωρίας του καθενός στοχαστή, η παρούσα εργασία επιχειρεί σε δύο κύρια μέρη να αναδείξει το σχεσιακό πλέγμα επί του οποίου δομείται μία, όσο το δυνατόν περισσότερο, σαφής έννοια του κακού. Επιπρόσθετα, η εκπόνησή της φιλοδοξεί στον εντοπισμό των πιθανών σημείων επαφής–απόκλισης αναφορικά με τη συγκεκριμένη έννοια. Το πρώτο μέρος της εργασίας αφορά την έννοια του κακού που θα δεχθεί επεξεργασία, θα αποσαφηνιστεί και θα επικρατήσει στη σκέψη του Leibniz. Κάτι τέτοιο κρίνεται ως εφικτό κυρίως μέσω της παρουσίασης, όπως και της διευκρίνισης των δύο βασικών επιχειρημάτων που θεμελιώνουν το εγχείρημα της θεοδικίας, δηλαδή του κακού εντός των ορίων της Θεωρίας του Καλύτερου Δυνατού Κόσμου και του κακού ως έλλειψης. Θεωρείται απαραίτητο το να διερευνηθούν λεπτομερώς οι συσχετίσεις της θεϊκής και της ανθρώπινης οντότητας με το κακό, όπως και η μεταξύ των δύο οντοτήτων διασύνδεση. Η προσπάθεια αυτής της διερεύνησης διεξάγεται στα πλαίσια της κοσμοθεώρησης του Leibniz η οποία άπτεται της περίοπτης θέσης της Μονάδας [La Monade], όπως και της Προδιατεταγμένης Αρμονίας [Le Système de l'Harmonie Préétablie] εντός αυτής. Ο λαϊβνίτειος Θεός, ο δημιουργός, κατόπιν ο συντηρητής της κοσμικής ολότητας, κατέχει τη δύναμη και τη γνώση για να καταστρώσει, να πραγματώσει ελεύθερα το υπέρτατο σχέδιό του για έναν κόσμο που θα είναι ο καλύτερος δυνατός στη σύγκρισή του με τον οποιονδήποτε. Μόνο που το εν λόγω σχέδιό του φέρει ένα άκρως σημαντικό ψεγάδι που, αναφορικά με όλα ανεξαιρέτως τα «γνώριμα» όντα που βιώνουν το συγκεκριμένο συμπαντικό μοντέλο, διαβρώνει στον μέγιστο βαθμό την εικόνα που τείνει προς την τελειότητα. Αυτό το διαχρονικά αξιόμεμπτο ελάττωμα του συστήματος θα είναι το κακό [le mal]. Η Θεοδικία θα επιχειρήσει τη διεισδυτική προσέγγισή της στην έννοια, τη φύση και την προέλευση του κακού σε συνάρτηση με τον Θεό και τον άνθρωπο, συντάσσοντας συνάμα τη δεξιοτεχνικά δομημένη απάντηση στους διάφορους επικριτές της, στους φιλοσόφους μα και τους θεολόγους οι οποίοι θα επιμείνουν αφενός στο ασύμβατο της θεϊκής φύσης με το κακό, αφετέρου στο δισυπόστατό της. Πριν από την έναρξη του δεύτερου μέρους το οποίο θα επικεντρωθεί στην έννοια του κακού βάσει της συλλογιστικής γραμμής του Schelling, στο κεφάλαιο «O Schelling για το “Κακό” του Leibniz» αντιπαρατίθεται το κακό τής ισχυρά ενεργής πνευματικής δύναμης στον αντίποδα της αντίστοιχης λαϊβνίτειας όψης, της βασισμένης σε ένα κακό στερημένο και συνάμα ελλειπτικό. Αυτή η αντιπαράθεση αποσκοπεί στην ανάδειξη των σημείων τομής, υπό την προϋπόθεση του ότι θα ληφθούν επίσης υπόψη τα διαφορετικά πλαίσια εντός των οποίων εκτυλίσσεται το έργο του καθενός στοχαστή: εκκινώντας από τον ενστερνισμό ενός αμετάκλητου Θεϊσμού προς την, μετέπειτα από έναν αιώνα, ενδυνάμωση, κατόπιν ακόμα και υπέρβαση των ορίων του Γερμανικού Ιδεαλισμού. Στην Εισαγωγή της πραγματείας για την Ουσία της Ανθρώπινης Ελευθερίας, ο Schelling προαναγγέλλει τη στροφή, την πρωτότυπη μα συνάμα και προκλητική, στο ξετύλιγμα των διαδρομών της έρευνάς του: το ξερίζωμα της παραδοσιακής τοποθέτησης του πνεύματος αντιμέτωπου με το υποθετικά άλογο της φύσης και την αντικατάστασή του με το, εξίσου υποθετικά αντιθετικό, ζεύγος αναγκαιότητα–ελευθερία. Καθ’ όλη τη διάρκεια της ολοκληρωτικής αυτής σάρωσης του εσώτερου φιλοσοφικού κέντρου, η πρωταρχική τοποθέτηση του καινοτόμου δίπολου θα ταλανίζει, χωρίς τη δυνατότητα απόρριψης ούτε του ενός ούτε του άλλου πόλου, εντατικά και επίμονα τους προβληματισμούς του Γερμανού φιλοσόφου. Διαποτισμένη από μία εσώτερη πανίσχυρη βουλητική δραστηριότητα, η δυνατότητα για την ανθρώπινη ελευθερία περιστρέφει τον κύριο άξονα της πραγματείας, ενσωματώνοντας τη βαθειά απόφαση για το καλό, μα συνάμα και για το κακό ως την ειδοποιό διαφορά, σε σύγκριση με τη θεϊκή και όλες τις υπόλοιπες οντότητες, του ανθρώπινου Wesen, δηλαδή του είναι που συγκρατεί το ανθρώπινο μαζί με την ιδιαίτερη ελευθερία η οποία ουσιαστικά διεκδικεί την ιδέα του ανθρωπισμού. Ο ίδιος ο Schelling επισημαίνει πως στην πραγματεία του θα εκφράσει τη διαλογική γένεση των πάντων μέσα στο κείμενο. Σε μία έτερη ερμηνευτική διαδρομή της ανάγνωσης του κορυφαίου αυτού φιλοσοφικού κειμένου, ο Wirth θα παραλληλίσει την εν λόγω γένεση με διαλεκτική καταιγίδα εν μέσω της διαφωνίας και της ανισορροπίας του Wesen, το οποίο εξάλλου, σε τελική ανάλυση, αναδεικνύεται μέσα από αυτήν τη λεκτική ρευστότητα. Μα θα είναι ο φιλόσοφος, εντέλει, εκείνος που θα γνωρίσει το ανέφικτο της όποιας απόπειρας για την εξ ολοκλήρου ιδιοποίηση του εννοιολογικού πλέγματος μίας τόσο αρχέγονης υφής, καθόσον ο διάλογος εκτυλίσσεται μεταξύ συνομιλητών που δεν είναι του ίδιου είδους. Μάλλον φαντάζει σαν κάποια στιχομυθία στην απόπειρα της επικοινωνίας με την ίδια τη φύση. σα να μιλά το φως με το κεκαλυμμένο, και μόνιμο, σκοτάδι του, και εκείνο να απαντά (Jason M. Wirth, The Conspiracy of Life ‒Meditations on Schelling and His Time, State University of New York Press, USA, 2003, σ.σ. 158‒160). / Within an extended spectrum of places and times of the human intellect, both the definition and the solution of the problem of evil will continuously and eagerly be sought. The most important issues, that form the key for the opening of a satisfactory understanding concerning the timeless evil's rootstock in the cosmic totality, impose the investigation of the relationship between the supreme entity with evil, just as the relationship between the finite rational entity with its freedom, even if this freedom is ultimately proven potential, possibly non-existent. Focused on the outstanding works: Essais de Théodicée sur la Bonté de Dieu, la Liberté de l'Homme et l'Origine du Mal (Essays of Theodicy on the Goodness of God, the Freedom of Man and the Origin of Evil) (1710) by Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz (1646‒1716) and Philosophische Untersuchungen Über das Wesen der Menschlichen Freiheit und die Damit Zusammenhängenden Gegenstände (Philosophical Investigations into the Essence of Human Freedom and Related Matters) (1809) by Friedrich Wilhelm Joseph Schelling (1775‒1854), the present paper attempts, in two main parts within the framework of each thinker's worldview, to feature the relational grid upon which has been structured a definite, as far as possible, sense of evil. Additionally, this paper aims to identify possible points of contact‒deviation regarding this specific concept, mainly within their stated works. The first part of this thesis concerns the concept of evil that will be edited, elucidated, and also will be prevailed on the thought of Leibniz. This has been considered possible primarily through the presentation, as well as the clarification of the two key arguments that ground the operation of theodicy: evil within the Best of All Possible Worlds Theory and evil as a deficiency. It is essential to investigate in detail the correlations of the divine and the human being with evil, as well as the two entities interconnection. The essay of this investigation is conducted within the cosmic view of Leibniz which relates to the prominence of the Monad [La Monade], just as the Pre-established Harmony [Le Système de l'Harmonie Préétablie] therein. The leibnizian God, the creator, then the cosmic whole maintainer, possesses the power and the knowledge to design, to realize freely his ultimate plan for a world that will be the best possible, comparing to any other. Though his project has a very important flaw which, at least for all, without any exception, its “familiar” beings that are experiencing this universal model, corrupts at the fullest extent the image which tends towards perfection. Evil [le mal] will be this timeless censurable fault within the system. The theodicy will attempt its penetrating approach to the conception, nature and origin of evil in relation to God and man, by composing the skillfully structured response to various critics, philosophers and theologians who will insist on both the incompatible of the divine nature with evil, and on the possibility of God's two natures. Before the beginning of the second part, which will be focused on the concept of evil under the line of Schelling's reasoning, in chapter “ Schelling On Leibniz's 'Evil' ”, an evil of a powerful active spiritual power confronts the corresponding leibnizian aspect, based on a deprived yet elliptical evil. This debate aims to highlight the sectional points, provided that is also needed to take into account the different contexts within which each thinker's philosophical work is unfolding: starting from the embracement of a irrevocable Theism to, a century later, the reinforcement, then even the transcendence of the limits of German Idealism. In the essay's Introduction on the Essence of Human Freedom, Schelling foreshadows the turn, both innovative yet provocative, during the unraveling of the inquiry's paths: the uprooting of spirit's traditional placement be faced with the hypothetical irrational nature and its replacement by the equally hypothetical oppositional pair of necessity‒freedom. Throughout the duration of this thoroughgoing total screening of the inner philosophical center, the central placement of the innovative dipole will torment, without the possibility of rejection either one or the other pole, intensively and persistently Schelling's thoughts. Permeated by a mighty inner volitional activity, human freedom's potential rotates the main axis of the treatise, incorporating profound decision for good, but at the same time for evil as the determinant distinction, both from divine and all the other entities of the human Wesen ‒of being which is holding together the humane with the particular freedom that claims the very idea of humanity. Schelling himself points out the essay as a dialectical genesis of everything within the text. In a parallel interpretive course that will be followed by reading this philosophical masterpiece, Wirth will compare that genesis with a dialectical storm amid the discordance and the imbalance of Wesen, which furthermore, in the final analysis, will be emerged through this verbal fluidity. But the very philosopher knows that it's not achievable to have totally appropriated the conceptual grid of this so much primitive texture, whereas the dialogue unfolds between interlocutors not of the same kind. Probably it is showing more like some crosstalk attempting communication with nature itself; it is like light addressees to its disguised and permanent darkness, and darkness responds (Wirth, 2003, p.p. 158‒160).

Thèse numérisée par la Division de la gestion de documents et des archives de l'Université de Montréal

In this study of the nineteenth-century German-Jewish philosopher Hermann Cohen, I argue that Cohen’s revision of Kantian ethics and moral theology is permeated with concepts drawn from and logically contoured by his interpretation of Maimonidean rationalism and Jewish sources, more generally. Through an idealizing hermeneutic, Cohen normativizes certain philosophical problems in post-Kantian philosophy and addresses them under the title of "pantheism" and "positivism". Between both pantheism and positivism, Cohen’s idealism presents a middle path, which I describe as "prophetic idealism", or a philosophy of time and ideality that interprets history, law, and ethical normativity as future-oriented. In other words, "prophecy" intimates a methodological role for temporality in practical philosophy and introduces a new meaning for legality in ethics. Cohen therefore offers a philosophy of Judaism, as a philosophy of religion, by normativizing the idea of prophecy and making it a conceptual model for reason-giving, agency, legal norms and ethical action. By focusing upon the critique of both pantheism and positivism, this dissertation therefore argues that Cohen’s negotiations of nineteenth-century philosophical problems introduces a normative role for Judaism as a public philosophy and the argument concludes by suggesting that Cohen’s philosophy of Judaism is instructive for contemporary public philosophy.

In this study of the nineteenth-century German-Jewish philosopher Hermann Cohen, I argue that Cohen’s revision of Kantian ethics and moral theology is permeated with concepts drawn from and logically contoured by his interpretation of Maimonidean rationalism and Jewish sources, more generally. Through an idealizing hermeneutic, Cohen normativizes certain philosophical problems in post-Kantian philosophy and addresses them under the title of "pantheism" and "positivism". Between both pantheism and positivism, Cohen’s idealism presents a middle path, which I describe as "prophetic idealism", or a philosophy of time and ideality that interprets history, law, and ethical normativity as future-oriented. In other words, "prophecy" intimates a methodological role for temporality in practical philosophy and introduces a new meaning for legality in ethics. Cohen therefore offers a philosophy of Judaism, as a philosophy of religion, by normativizing the idea of prophecy and making it a conceptual model for reason-giving, agency, legal norms and ethical action. By focusing upon the critique of both pantheism and positivism, this dissertation therefore argues that Cohen’s negotiations of nineteenth-century philosophical problems introduces a normative role for Judaism as a public philosophy and the argument concludes by suggesting that Cohen’s philosophy of Judaism is instructive for contemporary public philosophy.