Made available in DSpace on 2015-03-05T17:38:51Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 0 Previous issue date: 21 / Nenhuma / Esta tese pretende demonstrar que o Estado como o conhecemos na atualidade é produto do sistema econômico capitalista e surgiu nos séculos XVII e XVIII como produto de um processo de racionalização que organizou o exercício do poder político. O Estado da modernidade é a superação do Estado absoluto na medida em que toma em sua racionalidade o exercício privado da propriedade privada em substituição a propriedade que se concentrava no Estado absoluto e feudal. Suas crises são cíclicas e permanentes na medida em que operam como elementos capazes de gerar composições funcionais assegurando, portanto, sua sobrevivência enquanto aparato proposital-instrumental. Neste contexto, encontramos o homem como sujeito de transformações sociais. O homem engajado, que racionaliza para exercer interesses e que, assim, institui a sociedade na medida em que permite-se, por ela ser instituído. Os eventos da política, considerada como o ambiente por excelência onde (sobre)vive o Estado são produto da ação humana a partir da organ / This dissertation intends to demonstrate that the Government as we know presently is a product of the capitalist economical system and arose in the XVII and XVIII centuries as product of a process of rationalization that has organized the exercise of the political power. The State of modernity is the surpass of the absolute Government in proportion that takes in its rationality the private exercise of the private property replacement of the property that one used to concentrate in the absolute and feudal Government. Their crisis is cyclical and permanent in proportion that operates as agents able to produce functionaries constitutions assuring, therefore, its survival while purposed-instrumental display. In this context, one finds the man as individual of socials changes. The engaged man that rationalizes to exerts concerns to execute concerns and that, thus, establishes the society in proportion that one empowers, to be created by it. The events of the politics, considered as the surrounding by excellence wh

Ce mémoire de maîtrise défend qu’il n’est pas anecdotique que la question de la démocratie soit absente de l’œuvre philosophique de Michel Foucault. Au contraire, il soutient que le cadre théorique de la gouvernementalité neutralise la normativité démocratique et a fortiori, que la critique généalogique et l’esthétique de l’existence de Foucault confinent l’action politique à la sphère de l’éthique individuelle et conduisent à une esthétisation de la politique, irréconciliable avec un idéal démocratique à prétention universelle. Il maintient que le projet d’ontologie critique de nous-mêmes repose sur un décisionnisme fondé sur une disposition éthique en faveur de l’autonomie, mais que Foucault ne peut en reconnaître la valeur sans se contredire et échoue conséquemment à en tirer des conclusions politiques normatives. Le mémoire entreprend de reconstruire avec Castoriadis une conception philosophique de l’autonomie qui redonne une consistance politique et normative à la démocratie. Pour ce faire, il mobilise sa théorie de l’institution imaginaire de la société, l’ontologie de la création qui l’étaye et la philosophie de la praxis qui l’anime. À partir de sa définition comme incarnation politique de l’interrogation philosophique, ce mémoire conclut que la démocratie est essentielle à une vision de la politique informée par la valeur de l’autonomie individuelle et collective. Il examine finalement l’expérience historique de Mai 68 et les interprétations qu’en donnent Foucault et Castoriadis afin d’illustrer les débouchés politiques concrets de leur philosophie respective. / This dissertation argues that it is not anecdotal to find democracy absent from Michel Foucault's philosophical work. On the contrary, it claims that the theoretical framework of governmentality neutralizes democratic normativity, and a fortiori, that Foucault's genealogical critique and aesthetics of existence confine political action to the sphere of individual ethics and lead to an aestheticization of politics, irreconcilable with a democratic ideal with universal claims. It contends that the project of a critical ontology of ourselves rests on a decisionism founded on an ethical disposition in favour of autonomy, but that Foucault cannot recognize its value without self-contradiction and consequently fails to draw normative political conclusions. The dissertation sets out to reconstruct with Castoriadis a philosophical conception of autonomy that gives political and normative consistency to democracy. To this end, it mobilizes his theory of the imaginary institution of society, the ontology of creation that supports it, and the philosophy of praxis that drives it. Based on its definition as the political embodiment of the philosophical inquiry, this dissertation concludes that democracy is essential to a vision of politics informed by the value of individual and collective autonomy. Finally, it examines the historical experience of May 68 and Foucault's and Castoriadis' interpretations of it in order to illustrate the concrete political outcomes of their respective philosophies.