Made available in DSpace on 2016-04-25T20:20:22Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Rodolfo Medeiros Schian.pdf: 399665 bytes, checksum: e34cbf4be1003019f71e734f3ae49f11 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2011-06-22 / Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico / We live in turbulent times of social and ecological crises, and many researchers believe that these are associated, and often are the responsibility of the capitalist system. This linkage of social and environmental problems was seen only in 1960, with the emergence of environmental sociology, concluding that the degradation of natural resources was linked to industrial development. However, for many researchers sociologists, this issue, experienced by the company, could not be thoroughly examined in the absence of a theory to explain the relationship between society and nature as the classics of sociology (Marx, Weber and Durkheim), worked on environmental issues so tangential in his theories. Thus, this research was conducted to understand the concept of nature of Karl Marx, if in fact the environmental issue has been addressed tangentially in his work, as this classical thinker reflected the society-nature relationship in socialist theory, and what the extent of their concepts to understand the ecological problem. Through analysis of his major works and some Marxists, we found a thought developed on the relationship between society and nature, a conception of the revolutionary nature of its time, and above all, a theory developed by means of historical materialism, which serves as a basis for analyzing contemporary ecological problems. Marx had already completed what sociologists have concluded only in 1960 that the degradation of natural resources is associated with the capitalist industrial development. Thus, we conclude that socialism and ecology are involved / Vivemos uma época turbulenta, de crises sociais e ecológicas, e muitos pesquisadores acreditam que estas estão associadas e, por muitas vezes, são de responsabilidade do sistema capitalista. Essa ligação dos problemas socioambientais somente foi percebida em 1960, com o surgimento da sociologia ambiental, concluindo que a degradação dos recursos naturais estava associada ao desenvolvimento industrial. Entretanto, para muitos pesquisadores sociólogos, essa problemática, vivida pela sociedade, não poderia ser profundamente analisada por não existir uma teoria que explicasse a relação sociedade-natureza, pois os clássicos da sociologia, (Marx, Weber e Durkheim), trabalharam a questão ambiental de modo tangencial nas suas teorias. Partindo dessa afirmação, foi realizada uma pesquisa para compreender a concepção de natureza de Karl Marx, se de fato a questão ambiental foi tratada tangencialmente em sua obra, como esse pensador clássico refletia a relação sociedade-natureza dentro da teoria socialista, e qual seria o alcance dos seus conceitos para compreender a problemática ecológica. Por meio da análise de suas principais obras e de alguns marxistas, verificamos um pensamento desenvolvido sobre a relação sociedade-natureza, uma concepção de natureza revolucionária para o seu tempo, e acima de tudo, uma teoria desenvolvida por meio do materialismo histórico, que serve como base para analisar a problemática ecológica contemporânea. Marx já havia concluído o que os sociólogos concluíram somente em 1960, que a degradação dos recursos naturais está associada ao desenvolvimento industrial capitalista. Dessa forma, concluímos que socialismo e ecologia são correspondentes

Made available in DSpace on 2016-04-26T14:53:17Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Rodolfo Medeiros Schian.pdf: 399665 bytes, checksum: e34cbf4be1003019f71e734f3ae49f11 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2011-06-22 / Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico / We live in turbulent times of social and ecological crises, and many researchers believe that these are associated, and often are the responsibility of the capitalist system. This linkage of social and environmental problems was seen only in 1960, with the emergence of environmental sociology, concluding that the degradation of natural resources was linked to industrial development. However, for many researchers sociologists, this issue, experienced by the company, could not be thoroughly examined in the absence of a theory to explain the relationship between society and nature as the classics of sociology (Marx, Weber and Durkheim), worked on environmental issues so tangential in his theories. Thus, this research was conducted to understand the concept of nature of Karl Marx, if in fact the environmental issue has been addressed tangentially in his work, as this classical thinker reflected the society-nature relationship in socialist theory, and what the extent of their concepts to understand the ecological problem. Through analysis of his major works and some Marxists, we found a thought developed on the relationship between society and nature, a conception of the revolutionary nature of its time, and above all, a theory developed by means of historical materialism, which serves as a basis for analyzing contemporary ecological problems. Marx had already completed what sociologists have concluded only in 1960 that the degradation of natural resources is associated with the capitalist industrial development. Thus, we conclude that socialism and ecology are involved / Vivemos uma época turbulenta, de crises sociais e ecológicas, e muitos pesquisadores acreditam que estas estão associadas e, por muitas vezes, são de responsabilidade do sistema capitalista. Essa ligação dos problemas socioambientais somente foi percebida em 1960, com o surgimento da sociologia ambiental, concluindo que a degradação dos recursos naturais estava associada ao desenvolvimento industrial. Entretanto, para muitos pesquisadores sociólogos, essa problemática, vivida pela sociedade, não poderia ser profundamente analisada por não existir uma teoria que explicasse a relação sociedade-natureza, pois os clássicos da sociologia, (Marx, Weber e Durkheim), trabalharam a questão ambiental de modo tangencial nas suas teorias. Partindo dessa afirmação, foi realizada uma pesquisa para compreender a concepção de natureza de Karl Marx, se de fato a questão ambiental foi tratada tangencialmente em sua obra, como esse pensador clássico refletia a relação sociedade-natureza dentro da teoria socialista, e qual seria o alcance dos seus conceitos para compreender a problemática ecológica. Por meio da análise de suas principais obras e de alguns marxistas, verificamos um pensamento desenvolvido sobre a relação sociedade-natureza, uma concepção de natureza revolucionária para o seu tempo, e acima de tudo, uma teoria desenvolvida por meio do materialismo histórico, que serve como base para analisar a problemática ecológica contemporânea. Marx já havia concluído o que os sociólogos concluíram somente em 1960, que a degradação dos recursos naturais está associada ao desenvolvimento industrial capitalista. Dessa forma, concluímos que socialismo e ecologia são correspondentes

由於歷史和神學的複雜原因，自二十世紀後半葉至今的數十年時間里，正教神學經歷了一場十分可觀的復興，使得正教神學在國際學術界得到廣泛重視和熱烈的討論，其中尤為引人注目的是一嚮被視作正教特有的古老教義──成神論。它一經現代學者關注，便迅速發展成為普世教會對話的重要論題，為更多來自西方基督教傳統的神學家所研究。而現時，關於成神論的一個研究熱點就是發掘西方傳統中重要神學家思想中的成神論因素，或是探討其思想與成神論的關係。本研究關注的正是巴特（Karl Barth, 1886-1968）與成神論的關係。 / 現有對於巴特神學與成神論進行比較研究的文獻數量極少，而且存在著一個重要問題，即沒有能夠展現一個在規模上和深度上相當的成神論綜述，作為與巴特神學進行比較的參照。為解決這一問題本文選擇了洛斯基（VladimirLossky, 1903-1958）、茲茲奧拉斯（John Zizioulas）與斯塔尼萊（Dumitru Stăniloae,1903-1993）三位現代正教神學大家為代表，通過他們三人的神學來展現正教成神論的一個較為全面的風貌。 / 在這三位神學家中，洛斯基的神學主要繼承了聖帕拉瑪（St. Palamas,1296-1359）的思想，著力闡發上帝的神聖能力與神聖本質相區分的傳統教義，以此為進路通嚮成神論；茲茲奧拉斯則是以卡帕多西亞教父的論述的"位格"概念為核心，逐漸擺脫了神聖能力與神聖本質相區分的既定格局，發展出一種通過人與上帝的位格相遇而實現的成神論；斯塔尼萊作為一位集大成的正教神學家，在其巨著《正教教義神學》中系統展現了正教神學的全貌，說明了以人論、基督論、拯救論為主要支點的成神論，其實是正教教義神學的終極歸宿和總目標。 / 在考察過三位正教神學家的成神論思想后，轉入巴特的神學。針對與成神論關係密切相關的論題，著重考察巴特的基督論、人論，以及基於這二者的救贖論，並與東正教相對應問題的比較。通過比較最終發現，雖然兩者間在某些論題確實存在著難以抹殺的分歧，但巴特神學以基督論為基礎建構起的人論則與東正教傳統有著顯著的親和力，尤其在對罪觀的闡述上，已然突破了東西傳統之間的壁壘，形成了具有普世意義的教義理論，說明巴特的拯救觀已然超出了傳統西方的救贖論模式，與正教成神論有趨同之勢。 / 最後，在對整個研究做出總結的基礎上，闡明本研究的內在動機和現實意義，即進一步推進漢語學界對東正教神學的了解和認識，進而改善因了解的片面性造成的、在漢語學界仍然存在的對基督宗教的成見。並通過說明東正教神學思想與中國傳統思想的親和性，展現東正教神學研究對於建構漢語神學的積極意義。 / Due to both historical and theological reasons, the Orthodox theological tradition underwent a significant revival during the past several decades. Some themes in the Orthodox tradition drew the attention of international academia. Among them, the ancient doctrine of deification is unquestionable the most attractive one, which quickly became an important topic in the ecumenical dialogue. Nowadays, one of the hot issues concerning the study of deification is the comparison between the Orthodox and Western understandings of theosis or deification. In this thesis, the relation between Karl Barth(1886-1968)'s theology and the Orthodox doctrine of deification will be explored. / There are only a small number of existing studies dedicated to the comparison between Barth and the Orthodox doctrine of deification, and they focused rather exclusively on Christology. In order to give a comprehensive and extensive comparison between Barth and the Orthodox doctrine of deification, this thesis choose three masters of modern Orthodox theology as the reference points for comparison, and they are V. Lossky(1903-1958), John Zizioulas, and D.Stăniloae(1903-1993). / Following St. Palamas(1296-1359), Lossky based his theology of deification on the distinction between divine energy and essence. Zizioulas inherited Cappadocian Fathers' thought, and explained deification in terms of personal encounter. Staniloae articulated a comprehensive Orthodox dogmatic theology with deification as the centre or key of the whole system, and took theological anthropology, Christology, and Soteriology as the three pillars of the doctrine of deification. / After exploring these three orthodox theologians' thought, the discussion will turn to Barth’s theology, especially his Christology, anthropology, and doctrine of salvation. We will find that Barth’s theological anthropology, which is oriented by his Christology, shows certain similarities to the anthropology in Eastern Orthodox theology, and they share similar understanding of unio hypostatica and communicatio idiomatum. Furthermore, Barth’s understanding of sin together with salvation is not only quite far away from the hamartiology prevalent in western theological tradition, which is focused on original sin and its redemption, but also comes closer to the Orthodox theological tradition. Though there are undeniable differences between Barth and Orthodox theology, there are also significant affinities between them on the issue of deification. / To the end of this study, this thesis will discuss the significance of the studies of Orthodox theology for the Chinese academica. It is foreseeable that a careful study of Orthodox theology will clear some of the misunderstandings of or even biases against Christianity prevalent in the Chinese-speaking world. Meanwhile, the studies of Orthodox theology can also contribute a lot to the construction of Sino-Christian Theology due to the similarities between Orthodox theology and traditional Chinese religious-philosophical thought. / Detailed summary in vernacular field only. / Detailed summary in vernacular field only. / Detailed summary in vernacular field only. / Detailed summary in vernacular field only. / Detailed summary in vernacular field only. / 張少博. / Parallel title from added title page. / Thesis (Ph.D.) Chinese University of Hong Kong, 2015. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 131-137). / Abstracts also in English. / Zhang Shaobo.

Submitted by Leonardo Lima (leonardoperlim@gmail.com) on 2017-03-27T16:25:05Z No. of bitstreams: 2 license_rdf: 0 bytes, checksum: d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e (MD5) TADDEI, Paulo Eduardo Dias.pdf: 1243999 bytes, checksum: 9238e30c268d2c56440894fbabf6bba5 (MD5) / Approved for entry into archive by Simone Maisonave (simonemaisonave@hotmail.com) on 2017-04-02T21:41:08Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 2 TADDEI, Paulo Eduardo Dias.pdf: 1243999 bytes, checksum: 9238e30c268d2c56440894fbabf6bba5 (MD5) license_rdf: 0 bytes, checksum: d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e (MD5) / Approved for entry into archive by Fabiano Malheiro (fabianomalheiro22@hotmail.com) on 2017-04-27T17:58:07Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 2 TADDEI, Paulo Eduardo Dias.pdf: 1243999 bytes, checksum: 9238e30c268d2c56440894fbabf6bba5 (MD5) license_rdf: 0 bytes, checksum: d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2017-04-27T17:58:29Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 2 TADDEI, Paulo Eduardo Dias.pdf: 1243999 bytes, checksum: 9238e30c268d2c56440894fbabf6bba5 (MD5) license_rdf: 0 bytes, checksum: d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e (MD5) Previous issue date: 2014-03-28 / Sem bolsa / O presente estudo teórico é alicerçado em categorias formuladas por dois renomados pensadores e ativistas progressistas que, com suas ações e reflexões (práxis), marcaram indelevelmente a história do pensamento ocidental: Marx e Freire. O primeiro, tendo como postura de vida a luta sem tréguas pela emancipação humana. O segundo, pela sua luta pela libertação dos oprimidos. Ambos, muitas vezes não compreendidos, por preconceito ideológico e/ou desconhecimento de suas obras – este último, provavelmente, na maioria dos casos. O objetivo geral desta dissertação é fazer um estudo comparativo entre os dois autores para o aprofundamento da discussão sobre formação humana em uma perspectiva emancipatória, como dimensão fundamental nos processos que visem à transformação da realidade, contribuindo, assim, no oferecimento de subsídios teóricos para o aprofundamento da discussão sobre a educação na sociedade capitalista. Para atingir este desiderato, busca-se, a partir das categorias da exploração em Marx e da opressão em Freire, para os processos de formação humana, analisar se é possível afirmar que entre as proposições desses autores existem semelhanças, diferenças e ou contradições. Ao final, fez-se uma tentativa de síntese sobre o que é formação humana para Marx e o que é formação humana para Freire. Os elementos para a análise comparativa são: em Marx, ontologia e exploração e, em Freire, ontologia e opressão. Em ambos, busca-se explicitar o conceito e o mecanismo gerador da exploração e da opressão, as conseqüências, a proposição de superação e o horizonte. Esta dissertação é assim estruturada: no primeiro capítulo é feita uma “Breve contextualização da vida e da obra de Karl Marx e Paulo Freire”; o segundo capítulo é dedicado à análise do proposto. O terceiro capítulo é destinado às “Considerações sobre formação humana a partir de Karl Marx e Paulo Freire”. Conclui-se que tanto a proposta de formação humana em Marx quanto em Freire, guardando suas diferenças epistemológicas, gnosiológicas, ontológicas e temporais, são propostas libertadoras, que colocam o ser humano na centralidade do processo, visando sua emancipação: um de forma mais radical, o outro menos, mas ambos com uma proposta de transformação social, ainda que por caminhos diferentes. / This theoretical study is grounded in categories formulated by two renowned thinkers and progressive activists who, with their actions and reflections (praxis), indelibly have marked the history of Western thought: Marx and Freire. The first one having as stance of life, the incessant struggle for emancipation human. The second one, by his struggle for the liberation of the oppressed. although, both oftentimes not understood by ideological preconception and/or lack of knowledge of his works, this last one probably in most cases. The objective of this dissertation is make a comparative study between the two authors for deepening discussion about the human formation in an emancipatory perspective, as a fundamental dimension in the processes aimed at transformation of reality, contributing in offering theoretical subsidies to deepening the discussion of the education in capitalist society. To achieve this goal, whether seeked from the categories of exploitation in Marx and oppression in Freire, for the processes of human formation, examine if is possible to affirm, among the propositions of these authors if have similarities, differences and/or contradictions. In the end, is made an attempt to synthesis about what is human formation to Marx and what is human formation to Freire. The elements to the comparative analisys are: in Marx, ontology and exploitation, and in Freire, ontology and oppression. In both whether seeked to explicit the concept and the generator mechanism of exploitation and oppression, the consequences, the proposition to superation and the horizon. This dissertation is thus structured: in the first chapter is made a "Brief contextualization of the life and work of Karl Marx and Paulo Freire", the second chapter is devoted to the analysis of the proposed. The third chapter is destined to the "Considerations about human formation from Karl Marx and Paulo Freire". It is concluded as much as propositions of human formation in Marx as to Freire, saving their epistemological differences, gnostic, ontological, temporal, are them liberating proposals that places human being on the centrality of the process, aiming at his emancipation: one of them by more radical form, perhaps; the other less so. But both with a propose of social transformation, although by different ways.

No description available.

Submitted by Filipe dos Santos (fsantos@pucsp.br) on 2017-12-12T11:31:08Z No. of bitstreams: 1 Pedro Augusto Ciola de Almeida.pdf: 1437913 bytes, checksum: 6113d6dd4c49a1225406ed98f85729a5 (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2017-12-12T11:31:08Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Pedro Augusto Ciola de Almeida.pdf: 1437913 bytes, checksum: 6113d6dd4c49a1225406ed98f85729a5 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2017-11-28 / The philosophers are insightful in capturing the great changes in mainly of human activities such as economy, policy, science, religion and ethic. It doesn't only change the world we live but also man comprehension about themselves and the place ourselves occupy in universe. It doesn't mean the philosopher will make a well-succeeded reflection about the problems which cross his way. In fact, it happens the opposite: we commit more mistakes than right perceptions. Because of this according to Popper we must be criticals including about ourselves. In addition, Popper realized the scientifical revolution that would be with the coming of Einstein's science and he produced a new pattern of limit between science and non-science with the falsificacionism as well as he reinterpreted the value of scientifical and philosofical knowledge from a non-optimistic epistemology. On political philosophy, Popper inspired himself on Scandinavian counries and United Kingdom to build what he called openned society which means a tolerable society, not ready and over but under reformation on gradually and full time. Identifying the gradual and slow reformations of the open society is the thesis of this dissertation / Os filósofos são perspicazes em captar mudanças nas principais atividades humanas: economia, política, ciência, religião e a ética que não apenas mudam o mundo em que vivemos, mas também a própria compreensão de homem e o espaço que ocupa no universo. Isso não significa que o filósofo elaborará uma reflexão bem sucedida aos problemas que os interpela, na verdade ocorre o contrário: nós mais erramos do que acertamos, por essa razão segundo Popper devemos ser críticos e autocríticos. Com efeito, Popper percebeu a revolução cientifica que viria com o advento da ciência de Einstein e elaborou um novo critério de demarcação de ciência e não ciência com o falsificacionismo, bem como reinterpretou o valor do conhecimento cientifico e da filosofia a partir de uma epistemologia não otimista. Na filosofia política, Popper inspirou-se nos países escandinavos e no Reino Unido para construir o que chamou de sociedade aberta, isto é, uma sociedade tolerante, que não está pronta e acabada, mas que constantemente e gradualmente se reforma. Identificar as reformas graduais e lentas da sociedade aberta é a tese desta dissertação

No description available.

<p>The Swedish contemporary poet Ulf Karl Olov Nilsson (UKON) creates his poems by recycling and manipulating existing material. Though the overall opinion of his work has been positive, the idea that experimental poetry focus shape on the expense of content has led critics to either interpret the nonsensical and absurd aspects of UKON’s poetics as a consequence of the technical methods he uses to create his poetry, or to look beyond the nonsensical and absurd aspects to focus the fact that the poems creates meaning at all. The poems of UKON’s sixth collection of poems, Block (2005), differ from each other in many ways: some poems are lists and other revolves around a person – their content and construction vary and they can hardly be read as an expression of one persons thought. Still, the homogenous visual form creates a sense of uniformity – all the poems are shaped like blocks in different sizes, it has no page numbers and no names has been given the individual poems. By focusing the nonsensical and absurd aspects of UKON’s collection Block, and at the same time read the poetry through the light of the poetic context that UKON is connected to, this essays shows that UKON destroys and creates meaning in a way that is similar to the techniques used by the Victorian nonsense literature. As the Victorian nonsense literature make use of the language’s grammatical rules and genres to give the nonsense text a structure, UKON stages a reciprocal action between making use of and exceeding the conventional use of different language-contexts (e.g. erotic language or expressions such as “one must…”). Thus, the nonsensical aspects of UKON’s poetry are exposed as a consequent course of action to create and destroy meaning and Block can be read as a way to disclose how the language creates and maintains cultural clichés.</p>

Karl Jordan (1861-1959) was an extraordinarily productive entomologist who influenced the development of systematics, entomology, and naturalists' theoretical framework as well as their practice. He has been a figure in existing accounts of the naturalist tradition between 1890 and 1940 that have defended the relative contribution of naturalists to the modern evolutionary synthesis. These accounts, while useful, have primarily examined the natural history of the period in view of how it led to developments in the 1930s and 40s, removing pre-Synthesis naturalists like Jordan from their research programs, institutional contexts, and disciplinary homes, for the sake of synthesis narratives. This dissertation redresses this picture by examining a naturalist, who, although often cited as important in the synthesis, is more accurately viewed as a man working on the problems of an earlier period. This study examines the specific problems that concerned Jordan, as well as the dynamic institutional, international, theoretical and methodological context of entomology and natural history during his lifetime. It focuses upon how the context in which natural history has been done changed greatly during Jordan's life time, and discusses the role of these changes in both placing naturalists on the defensive among an array of new disciplines and attitudes in science, and providing them with new tools and justifications for doing natural history. One of the primary intents of this study is to demonstrate the many different motives and conditions through which naturalists came to and worked in natural history. It argues that understanding this diversity within the views, methods, and priorities of naturalists is not only important to developing a more accurate understanding of the naturalist tradition, but to understanding the ramifications of the complexity in the naturalist tradition for the fate of certain research programs as well. / Graduation date: 2004

The Swedish contemporary poet Ulf Karl Olov Nilsson (UKON) creates his poems by recycling and manipulating existing material. Though the overall opinion of his work has been positive, the idea that experimental poetry focus shape on the expense of content has led critics to either interpret the nonsensical and absurd aspects of UKON’s poetics as a consequence of the technical methods he uses to create his poetry, or to look beyond the nonsensical and absurd aspects to focus the fact that the poems creates meaning at all. The poems of UKON’s sixth collection of poems, Block (2005), differ from each other in many ways: some poems are lists and other revolves around a person – their content and construction vary and they can hardly be read as an expression of one persons thought. Still, the homogenous visual form creates a sense of uniformity – all the poems are shaped like blocks in different sizes, it has no page numbers and no names has been given the individual poems. By focusing the nonsensical and absurd aspects of UKON’s collection Block, and at the same time read the poetry through the light of the poetic context that UKON is connected to, this essays shows that UKON destroys and creates meaning in a way that is similar to the techniques used by the Victorian nonsense literature. As the Victorian nonsense literature make use of the language’s grammatical rules and genres to give the nonsense text a structure, UKON stages a reciprocal action between making use of and exceeding the conventional use of different language-contexts (e.g. erotic language or expressions such as “one must…”). Thus, the nonsensical aspects of UKON’s poetry are exposed as a consequent course of action to create and destroy meaning and Block can be read as a way to disclose how the language creates and maintains cultural clichés.