Made available in DSpace on 2016-04-27T17:26:52Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Guilherme Magalhaes Oliveira.pdf: 689794 bytes, checksum: 9f5057f96f879fa225b4f24f6f1b8b1e (MD5) Previous issue date: 2010-11-05 / Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico / Our object of study is the relation between music and cosmology in Pythagoreanism, specifically in the fragments by Philolaus of Croton (470-385 b.C.), a pythagorean philosopher who influenced both Platonic and Aristotelian philosophy. This investigation is divided into four parts: (1) Music in Ancient Greece, where we briefly examine the meaning of the word mousike and its relation to Greek culture, from Homer up until the Lyrical Poets. (2) Pythagoras and Pythagoreanism, where we discuss who was Pythagoras and his community. (3) Philolaus Pythagoreanism, where we analyze Philolaus fragments and explain the principles of his cosmology. Here, the meaning of limited (peras) and unlimited (apeira), his two cosmological principles, are discussed. Then we investigate the concept of harmony, understood here as a third principle, which serves the purpose of uniting in good proportion the first two principles in order to form an ordered whole (kosmos). As we look into the meaning of harmony, we also analyze the importance of the number, or arithmos, in Philolaus philosophy, since it is directly related to the concept of harmony. (4) In Music and the Cosmos, after we have explained Philolaus fundamental concepts, we demonstrate how they are linked to music, i.e. to the numeric ratios that are considered to be musical (or sound) intervals and the formation of the diatonic scale. According to Philolaus and the Pythagoreans, this scale presents a specific mathematical/musical structure, which is an image or imitation of the structure of the kosmos. Finally, we show that Philolaus diatonic scale is also used by Plato, on his Timeu / Nosso objeto de estudo é a relação entre música e cosmologia no pitagorismo, mais especificamente nos fragmentos de Filolau de Crotona (470-385 a.C.), filósofo pitagórico que exerceu influência na filosofia platônica e aristotélica. Esta investigação está dividida em quatro partes: (1) Música na Grécia Antiga, onde investigamos brevemente o significado da palavra mousike e sua relação com a cultura grega de Homero até os Poetas Líricos. (2) Pitágoras e o Pitagorismo, onde investigamos quem foi Pitágoras e sua comunidade. (3) O Pitagorismo de Filolau, onde analisaremos os fragmentos de Filolau e explicaremos os princípios de sua cosmologia. Será abordado o significado de limitado (peras) e ilimitado (apeira), seus dois princípios cosmológicos. Em segundo lugar, investigaremos o significado de harmonia, aqui entendida como um terceiro princípio, que possui o papel de unir em boa proporção os dois primeiros princípios para formar um todo ordenado (kosmos). Ao investigarmos o significado de harmonia, também apresentaremos a importância do número, ou arithmos, na filosofia de Filolau, já que este está diretamente relacionado com a harmonia. (4) A Música e o Cosmos, última parte de nosso trabalho que, após termos explicado os conceitos fundamentais de Filolau, mostraremos como eles estão vinculados com a música, ou seja, com as razões numéricas entendidas como intervalos musicais (de sons) e com a formação da escala diatônica que, segundo Filolau e os pitagóricos, possui uma estrutura matemático-musical específica, que é uma imagem ou imitação da estrutura do kosmos. Por último, mostraremos que essa escala de Filolau é a mesma usada por Platão, no Timeu

Made available in DSpace on 2016-04-27T17:26:51Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Bruno Loureiro Conte.pdf: 597433 bytes, checksum: 474791994388813765e9eb9230745941 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2010-11-04 / Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior / It is widely known that Parmenides Poem, which is considered a fundamental work in Greek philosophical thought, presents a plurality of mythical elements, and that its clarification constitutes an issue to the interpreters. This research is an investigation of the historical and philosophical meaning of mythos and logos in the Poem, considering the work in its cultural contexts. Our analysis begins by bringing to the foreground the presence of mythos, understood in its original sense of authorized way of speaking, pointing out its interweaving with logos, in such a manner that without the former the argument of the latter would remain incomprehensible. On the other hand, we aim to determine the specificity of logos in Parmenides: it shows up as a reflexive, refutative logos, but not, as some interpreters have sustained, a strict demonstration . Having established this point, Parmenides work shows itself as productive of a plurality of mythical assemblages, appropriating images of the traditional inspired poet, of initiation in cults of mystery, of divinity figures and of the Archaic Lyric conception of human existence. Furthermore, the Poem deploys itself in multiple discursive configurations: narration, argument, oracular speaking. In accordance to that, we introduce an interpretative hypothesis associating the Goddess speech in the Poem to a particular kind of oracle, similar to that of the mantic healer. Such associations or assemblages, nonetheless, are not simple reproductions of aspects already present in Greek culture: they are, as a matter of fact, subverted in the direction of the philosophically instituted radical reflection, which collects signals from visible and invisible, leading to thinking / Como é bem sabido, o poema de Parmênides, considerado uma das obras fundamentais do pensamento filosófico grego, apresenta uma pluralidade de elementos míticos, seu esclarecimento constituindo um problema para os intérpretes. Trata-se, neste trabalho, de investigar o significado histórico-filosófico do mythos e do logos no poema, a partir da inserção da obra em seus contextos culturais. Nossa análise inicia-se destacando a presença do mythos, entendido em seu sentido original de maneira autorizada de falar, mostrando-o de tal modo entrelaçado ao logos que o argumento , sem ele, sequer seria compreensível. De outro lado, procuramos determinar a especificidade do logos de Parmênides: trata-se de um logos reflexivo, refutativo , mas não, como pretendem alguns intérpretes, de uma estrita demonstração . Estabelecido esse ponto, surge a obra de Parmênides como produtora de agenciamentos míticos diversos, apropriando-se das imagens do poeta tradicional inspirado, da iniciação nos cultos de mistérios, de figuras de divindades e da concepção da existência humana presente na Lírica arcaica, efetuando-se o poema em múltiplas configurações discursivas (narrativa, argumento, fala oracular). Nesse sentido, introduzimos a hipótese interpretativa da associação da fala da deusa no poema a um tipo específico de oráculo, similar ao do médico-adivinho. Tais associações ou agenciamentos, todavia, não se revelam como simples reproduções de aspectos presentes na cultura grega: eles são mesmo subvertidos em direção à instauração filosófica de uma reflexão radical, que recolhe sinais do visível e do invisível, conduzindo ao pensar

A perennial question in the philosophy of history is whether history is a science or an art. This thesis contests that this question constitutes a false dichotomy, limiting the discussion in such a way as to exclude other possibilities of understanding the nature of the historical task. The speculative philosophies of Augustine, Kant, and Marx; the critical philosophies of Ranke, Comte along with the later positivist, and the historical idealist such as Collingwood will be surveyed. History is then examined along side art to discuss not only the similarities but, the differences. Major similarities—narrative presentation, emplotation, and the selective nature of historical evidence—between history and fiction are critiqued. A word study of the Greek word ίστοριά will show the essential difference between history and literature. The essential nature of the historical task can best be revealed in the differences between history and art.

Lorsque, au IVe siècle, les Romains rendirent hommage à la sagesse, ils érigèrent une statue de Pythagore. Pline l’Ancien s’en étonne : pourquoi n’a-t-on pas plutôt choisi Socrate ? Cette interrogation reflète l’intégration progressive de la figure du philosophe athénien à Rome, depuis le IIe siècle av. J.C. jusqu’à l’œuvre de Sénèque qui intériorise le modèle socratique d’enseignement.Est d’abord réuni le corpus exhaustif des occurrences de Socrate dans une perspective diachronique. Les passages sont contextualisés dans l’économie de l’œuvre, son genre et les objectifs de chaque auteur. La source grecque est, si possible, identifiée : la présence de Socrate sert alors de marqueur de la lecture des textes de Platon, de Xénophon, mais aussi d’autres Socratiques comme Eschine.Dans un second temps, les textes sont étudiés selon des regroupements chronologiques et thématiques : est alors définie une double réception de Socrate, entre valorisation et mépris, qui s’articule autour de sa grandeur, son rôle fondateur pour les écoles de pensée hellénistiques, sa mort courageuse et, à rebours, sa dénonciation de la rhétorique ou le caractère inutile des propos des Socratiques pour lutter contre les passions. Au mode de vie philosophique qu’incarne Socrate s’oppose parfois celui défini par le mos maiorum, ou encore par le poète élégiaque. Se dévoilent différentes interprétations de Socrate, ancêtre du cynisme et du stoïcisme, probabiliste ou transcendantaliste, ouvrant ainsi la voie à un transfert culturel des œuvres, mais aussi de leurs exégèses. Que ce soit dans une perspective historiographique, philosophique ou littéraire, Socrate devient peu à peu un exemplum, un modèle de vie. / When, in 343 B.C., the Romans paid tribute to wisdom, they built a statue of Pythagoras. Why was not Socrates chosen instead ? Pliny the Elder wonders. This interrogation reflects the progressive integration of the figure of the Athenian philosopher in Rome, from the second century B.C. until the work of Seneca which internalises the Socratic teaching model.At first, the exhaustive corpus of the occurrences of Socrates is gathered in a diachronic perspective. The passages are contextualized in the entire work, its genre and the purposes of every author. The Greek sources are, when possible, identified : the presence of Socrates serves then as a marker for the reading of the texts of Plato, Xenophon, but also other Socratics like Aeschines.Secondly, the texts are studied according to chronological and thematic groupings : a double reception of Socrates is then defined, between praise and contempt, which articulates around his greatness, his founding role for the Hellenistic philosophic schools, his courageous death and, on the contrary, his denunciation of rhetoric or the fact that Socratics’ theories are useless to fight against passions. The philosophic lifestyle embodied by Socrates sometimes contrasts with the one defined by the mos maiorum, or by the elegiac poets. Various interpretations of Socrates come to light, as an ancestor of Cynicism and Stoicism, as a sceptic or a transcendentalist, paving the way for a cultural transfer of the Greek philosophical works but also of their exegeses. Whether it be in an historiographic, philosophic or literary perspective, Socrates gradually becomes an exemplum, a model of life.

The argument advanced is this thesis is that the entities that make up the environment are those that do not owe their origin to any willful creative activity but have evolved through accidental natural processes. This fact of not being willfully created makes the environment ontologically independent and confers on it intrinsic value as opposed to instrumental value. This intrinsic value is one that all the entities that make up the environment share. It is further argued that this intrinsic value is aesthetic rather than moral. Only beings that are specially endowed with certain capacities, like reflection and understanding, could be said, in the context of this work, to have intrinsic moral value in the sense of being moral agents. But as moral agents, we need to give moral considerability to all the natural entities in the environment since they share the same natural right with us, based on our common origin. So, even though the nonhuman, natural entities in the environment do not have moral rights, they have natural rights. It is further argued that this natural right could be best safeguarded in a legal framework.

The argument advanced is this thesis is that the entities that make up the environment are those that do not owe their origin to any willful creative activity but have evolved through accidental natural processes. This fact of not being willfully created makes the environment ontologically independent and confers on it intrinsic value as opposed to instrumental value. This intrinsic value is one that all the entities that make up the environment share. It is further argued that this intrinsic value is aesthetic rather than moral. Only beings that are specially endowed with certain capacities, like reflection and understanding, could be said, in the context of this work, to have intrinsic moral value in the sense of being moral agents. But as moral agents, we need to give moral considerability to all the natural entities in the environment since they share the same natural right with us, based on our common origin. So, even though the nonhuman, natural entities in the environment do not have moral rights, they have natural rights. It is further argued that this natural right could be best safeguarded in a legal framework.