Software systems form an essential part of Western society,serving as tools to uphold institutions, processes andservices. It is understandable, therefore, that the mostfundamental aspects of programs are their function and utility.But they are not, however, the only things programmers areconcerned with when writing them. On the contrary, programmers also discuss about many otheraspects of software, including the beauty of code. Theydistinguish between different programming styles and expresstheir personal preferences, often by way of admiring andvilifying other people's code. Programmers' identification withaesthetic preferences may give rise to vanity, to disagreementsso entrenched that they deserve the name of 'holy wars' and toother similar phenomena. This thesis describes and analyses these phenomena, whichultimately originate in the human faculty to create andappreciate nuances, to become attached to them and to engage indisputes because of them - even infields as standardised ascomputer programming. Its aim is to expose the aesthetics ofcode, and in doing so, to discuss the symbolic aspects ofinstrumental action at large. Keywords:aesthetics, code, instrumental action,internet discussion fora, programming, symbolic action / <p>NR 20140805</p>

<p>Software systems form an essential part of Western society,serving as tools to uphold institutions, processes andservices. It is understandable, therefore, that the mostfundamental aspects of programs are their function and utility.But they are not, however, the only things programmers areconcerned with when writing them.</p><p>On the contrary, programmers also discuss about many otheraspects of software, including the beauty of code. Theydistinguish between different programming styles and expresstheir personal preferences, often by way of admiring andvilifying other people's code. Programmers' identification withaesthetic preferences may give rise to vanity, to disagreementsso entrenched that they deserve the name of 'holy wars' and toother similar phenomena.</p><p>This thesis describes and analyses these phenomena, whichultimately originate in the human faculty to create andappreciate nuances, to become attached to them and to engage indisputes because of them - even infields as standardised ascomputer programming. Its aim is to expose the aesthetics ofcode, and in doing so, to discuss the symbolic aspects ofinstrumental action at large.</p><p><b>Keywords:</b>aesthetics, code, instrumental action,internet discussion fora, programming, symbolic action</p>

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.