Published Article / The article revisits the concept and phenomenon of human communication to show that it deserves to be part of a first-year undergraduate core curriculum which aims to further knowledge and advance learning. Conceptual analysis and critical and rational argumentation are employed. Teaching students about what human communication really is and, concomitantly, what it entails existentially as well as adopting the appropriate spirit, stance and method for authentic intercultural communication, could go a long way in equipping them to be critical thinkers, competent citizens, and compassionate human beings in the worlds in which they live.

In this inquiry I pursue two tasks. First, I locate the roots of Heidegger's philosophical project historically within a specific theological discourse bent on redefining the relation between religion and politics. Heidegger's main, if covert, intent was to combat the egalitarian, pluralistic impulses carried by a tradition of critical Christology, which leads from F.W.J. Schelling's (1775-1854) Philosophy of Revelation to the work of the radical theologian-philosopher Paul Tillich (1886-1965). These egalitarian impulses spring from a broadened understanding of religious community as a material communication community unified through the use of shared symbols into a community of understanding, knowledge, and interests. The theoretical expansion and deepening of such a communication model, I detect in the writings of the renegade Neogrammarian, Hermann Paul, here considered in light of the "neo-Idealist" initiative of one of Paul's most prominent critics, the Romanist Karl Vossler. Prior to the advanced theological exposition of symbolically mediated communication, in works such as Tillich's book Dynamics of Faith (2001; Engl. orig.1957), the Neogrammarian movement in language studies, I argue, holds the key to accessing the cloaked Christological subtext of Heidegger's thought. Second, after thus locating Heidegger's philosophical agenda within its intellectual-historical context, I expose how Heidegger manipulates philosophical rhetoric to achieve the suspension of Schelling's theological legacy. My analysis of Heidegger's rhetorical behavior is focused on his Letter on Humanism (written 1946, published 1949), a text very overt in both its philosophical biases and its politics. The Humanismusbrief comes the closest to revealing Heidegger's own self-positioning within his generation. The work's conclusion provides a brief look ahead, or Ausblick, to indicate the main features of how these findings about the Letter can be brought to bear on Heidegger's masterpiece fragment, Being and Time. Through this approach, Heidegger's inherently political philosophy gains a much clearer profile in the context of its formative phase in the waning days of the Weimar Republic and opens a new perspective on later attempts by its author to "re-apply" his philosophical program to the cultural situation of postwar Germany, as well as to the ethical-epistemological problems remaining after twelve years of German isolationism. / text

Apresentamos neste trabalho a tradução da primeira parte do Commentarium in Hermogenis librum PerÈ st.sewn, de Siriano Filoxeno, o isocrático. Na introdução procuramos circunscrever o gênero do comentário retórico às estases de Hermógenes, como praticado por filósofos platônicos durante os séculos III a VI d.C. Comisso pretendemos discorrer sobre como a sofística e a retórica se dão no currículo próprio das chamadas escolas filosóficas, que se evidencia pelo gênero encomiástico das vidas. Nessa operação, procuramos evidenciar como os filósofos platônicos interessam-se pela retórica declamatória, reaproximando os problemas que dizem respeito à invenção daqueles que concernem ao logos e a apreensão (kat.lhyic). Por fim, relativizamos, a partir da leitura do Comentário de Siriano, as categorias modernas que separam os filósofos platônicos da segunda sofística. / Here we present a translation of the rst part of the CommentariuminHermogenis librum PerÈ st^sewn, written by Syrianus Philoxenus, the isocratic. In the introduction we seek to circumscribe the rhetorical comment to stasis theory of Hermogenes a special kind of introductory work, as practiced by Platonic philosophers over the third to the sixth century. erewith, we intend to talk about how sophistry and rhetoric could happen in an curriculum, concerning the so called philosophical schools presented in the encomiastic gender of lifes. In this operation, we show how the Platonic philosophers rea>rm your interest in the declamatory rhetoric, reconnecting the problems that concern the invention (eÕresic) of those logos and his apprehension (kat^lhyic). Finally, from reading the Syrianus Commentary, we hope to relativize the modern categories that separate the Platonic philosophers from the Second Sophistic.

Apresentamos neste trabalho a tradução da primeira parte do Commentarium in Hermogenis librum PerÈ st.sewn, de Siriano Filoxeno, o isocrático. Na introdução procuramos circunscrever o gênero do comentário retórico às estases de Hermógenes, como praticado por filósofos platônicos durante os séculos III a VI d.C. Comisso pretendemos discorrer sobre como a sofística e a retórica se dão no currículo próprio das chamadas escolas filosóficas, que se evidencia pelo gênero encomiástico das vidas. Nessa operação, procuramos evidenciar como os filósofos platônicos interessam-se pela retórica declamatória, reaproximando os problemas que dizem respeito à invenção daqueles que concernem ao logos e a apreensão (kat.lhyic). Por fim, relativizamos, a partir da leitura do Comentário de Siriano, as categorias modernas que separam os filósofos platônicos da segunda sofística. / Here we present a translation of the rst part of the CommentariuminHermogenis librum PerÈ st^sewn, written by Syrianus Philoxenus, the isocratic. In the introduction we seek to circumscribe the rhetorical comment to stasis theory of Hermogenes a special kind of introductory work, as practiced by Platonic philosophers over the third to the sixth century. erewith, we intend to talk about how sophistry and rhetoric could happen in an curriculum, concerning the so called philosophical schools presented in the encomiastic gender of lifes. In this operation, we show how the Platonic philosophers rea>rm your interest in the declamatory rhetoric, reconnecting the problems that concern the invention (eÕresic) of those logos and his apprehension (kat^lhyic). Finally, from reading the Syrianus Commentary, we hope to relativize the modern categories that separate the Platonic philosophers from the Second Sophistic.