The suffering that initially prompts ethical reflection is frequently forgotten in the generalised rational response of much contemporary International Relations theory. This thesis draws on Theodor W. Adorno and Gillian Rose to propose an alternative approach to suffering in world politics. Adorno argues suffering and trauma play a key role in the task of enlightening Enlightenment. They emphasise the concrete particularity of human existence in a way that is radically challenging to Enlightenment thought. Understanding suffering helps to drive a negative dialectics that preserves the non-identical (that which cannot be understood, manipulated or controlled by reason), holding it up against the instrumentalism and abstraction that have prevented Enlightenment thought from fulfilling its promise. Part One reviews contemporary approaches to international ethics in a way that draws out their affinity with the Enlightenment thought Adorno criticises. Despite their variety, liberal and Habermasian approaches to international ethics tend to be rational and problem-solving, to assume moral progress, to underestimate the importance of history and culture, and to neglect inner lives. They approach ethics in a way that pays too little attention to the social, historical, and cultural antecedents of suffering and therefore promotes solutions that, whilst in some ways inspiring, are too disconnected from the suffering they seek to address to be effective in practice. Part Two deepens the critique of modern ethics through an exposition of Adorno's work. It then draws on Adorno's conception of promise, Rose's writing on mourning and political risk, and a broader literature on ways of working through trauma to propose an alternative way of being in the world with ethical and political implications. I advocate a neo-Hegelian work of mourning, which deepens understanding of the complexities of violence and informs a difficult, tentative, anxiety-ridden taking of political risk in pursuit of a good enough justice.

Theodor W. Adorno (1903-1969) propose une philosophie dont les problèmes centraux concernent la réalité sociale. Depuis cette perspective, nous démontrerons, à travers la présentation de quelques modèles théoriques, comment les problèmes traités sont déterminés historiquement et comment la quête de leur résolution engage la philosophie à entrer dans un rapport critique avec elle-même. Cette critique a pour but de corriger les excès de la théorie de la vérité comme adéquation dont la philosophie s’est montrée responsable, tant vis-à-vis d’elle-même que vis-à-vis de l’histoire. À travers ce parcours, nous défendons la thèse que le modèle adornien effectue une « négation déterminée » du concept de totalité sociale en vue d’orienter le penser vers la conscience et la connaissance des éléments hétérogènes de la réalité. Selon nous, une telle réorientation permettrait de rouvrir la conscience à l’expérience de ce qu’elle a de plus précieux : la possibilité de rendre compte de ses erreurs et de les corriger. / Theodor W. Adorno (1903-1969) puts forward a philosophy whose central problems concern social reality. From this same perspective, I aim to demonstrate, through the presentation of few theoretical models, how these problems are historically determined and how the search for their solutions imposes the task of self-criticism upon philosophy. This self-critique aims to correct certain excesses of the identity theory of truth for which philosophy is responsible historically and theoretically. Throughout this development, I argue that the Adornian model carries out a “determinate negation” of the concept of social totality. In this negation, Adorno guides thinking towards an awareness and knowledge of the heterogeneous elements of reality. I argue that this allows conscienceness to open itself to the most important aspect of philosophical experience: the possibility of acknowledging one’s mistakes and of correcting them.

Theodor W. Adorno (1903-1969) propose une philosophie dont les problèmes centraux concernent la réalité sociale. Depuis cette perspective, nous démontrerons, à travers la présentation de quelques modèles théoriques, comment les problèmes traités sont déterminés historiquement et comment la quête de leur résolution engage la philosophie à entrer dans un rapport critique avec elle-même. Cette critique a pour but de corriger les excès de la théorie de la vérité comme adéquation dont la philosophie s’est montrée responsable, tant vis-à-vis d’elle-même que vis-à-vis de l’histoire. À travers ce parcours, nous défendons la thèse que le modèle adornien effectue une « négation déterminée » du concept de totalité sociale en vue d’orienter le penser vers la conscience et la connaissance des éléments hétérogènes de la réalité. Selon nous, une telle réorientation permettrait de rouvrir la conscience à l’expérience de ce qu’elle a de plus précieux : la possibilité de rendre compte de ses erreurs et de les corriger. / Theodor W. Adorno (1903-1969) puts forward a philosophy whose central problems concern social reality. From this same perspective, I aim to demonstrate, through the presentation of few theoretical models, how these problems are historically determined and how the search for their solutions imposes the task of self-criticism upon philosophy. This self-critique aims to correct certain excesses of the identity theory of truth for which philosophy is responsible historically and theoretically. Throughout this development, I argue that the Adornian model carries out a “determinate negation” of the concept of social totality. In this negation, Adorno guides thinking towards an awareness and knowledge of the heterogeneous elements of reality. I argue that this allows conscienceness to open itself to the most important aspect of philosophical experience: the possibility of acknowledging one’s mistakes and of correcting them.

La présente thèse se propose d’étudier la question de la littérature dans l’œuvre d’Adorno. Elle fait apparaître la fonction utopique que le philosophe attribue à la littérature en tant que celle-ci dessine l’horizon d’une « langue sans terre », ligne de fuite hors de la dialectique de la raison. Tandis que le discours philosophique a reproduit dans son appareil conceptuel la violence mythico-rationnelle à l’encontre du singulier non-identique, la langue littéraire semble en mesure d’indiquer la possibilité de parvenir par le concept au-delà du concept, ce qui constitue le désir utopique de la dialectique négative. L’enjeu n’est pas seulement épistémique : il est bien éthico-politique, lié à la possibilité d’établir des rapports à l’autre libérés de la contrainte de l’identité.Dans les œuvres littéraires dont il entreprend la lecture – qu’il s’agisse de celle d’Eichendorff, de Hölderlin, de Proust, de Valéry, de Beckett ou encore de Kafka – Adorno ne cherche cependant pas une figure concrète de l’utopie, mais la trace de « ce qui nous appartient en propre et qui a été laissé en blanc » – aussi bien dans les textes que dans l’Histoire. La littérature porte alors en creux ce possible impossible dont la puissance hante le présent entre ses lignes ; elle est de la réconciliation (Versöhnung) une image sans image, tout à la fois ressource de la critique radicale des conditions existantes et réserve du désir d’un autre à venir. / This dissertation proposes to study the question of literature in the work of Adorno. It shows the utopian function which the philosopher attributes to literature as it draws the horizon of a "language without soil", a line of flight from the dialectic of reason. While philosophical discourse reproduces in its conceptual apparatus the mythical-rational violence against the non-identical singular, the language of literature seems able to indicate the possibility of reaching beyond the concept with the help of the concept, which is the utopian desire of negative dialectics. The challenge is not only epistemic: it is ethical-political as well, related to the possibility of establishing relations with others which are freed from the constraints of identity.In the literary works which he studies – those of Eichendorff, Hölderlin, Proust, Valery, Beckett or Kafka –, Adorno does however not seek a concrete figure of utopia, but rather traces of "what is our own and has been left blank" - both in these texts and in History. In those blanks, literature contains the « possible impossible » which haunts the present ; it is the picture without picture of Reconciliation (Versöhnung), a resource for both a radical critique of existence and for the desire of the other to come.

Made available in DSpace on 2015-04-14T13:55:12Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 436149.pdf: 770389 bytes, checksum: 1159cc1b100fc3bc72e39574599e17d6 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2011-12-16 / This study investigates the criticism made by Theodor Adorno and Max Horkheimer to the modern concept of rationality in the Dialectics of Enlightenment, which is essentially focalized in the promises of the Aufkl?rung. When they broached the origin of Western logos in a succinct and unique form , realized that the genealogy of knowledge, they perceived that the core is in the dramatic and incontrollable need of the human being to have a self-reliance before the forces of nature which imposes fear. Therefore, the concept of enlightenment can not be understood only in light of eighteenth. For the authors, in the myth there was a knowledge, which is intuitive, explanatory and inseparable from the clarifier thought. This aimed to give explanations and justifications about the events of the relationship between human being and nature. Therefore, i every resistance in the attempt to dominate nature, human beings will increase his potential, his strength and power over it. Thus, the starting point of the Dialectics of Enlightenment is a critique of the enlighten society and modern rationality, which has become instrumental. They make us realize the limits of modernity, reason and science, the more subtle and aggressive aspects that were already present in the mutual relationship between myth and enlightenment. Though the topic broached 'rational dialectic between myth and enlightenment' constitutes the course of this dissertation, it is important to review the question which the authors used to do: why mankind is sinking into a new kind of barbarism? Faced with this question they investigate critically and deepen the strategic and instrumental knowledge that became a mechanism of power and repression. With the thesis that the myth is elucidation and elucidation has become mythology, also shows that modern rationality, under the 'lights' of the reason, has its regression germ in everywhere. The research is developed in three stages: the first chapter includes the context and the sources of the main philosophical questions of the opus Dialectic of Elucidation; the second presents Odysseus as the prototype of modern man from the tour I; Finally, the last chapter deals with the dialectic rationality between myth and elucidation / Este estudo investiga a cr?tica realizada por Theodor Adorno e Max Horkheimer ao conceito de racionalidade moderna, na Dial?tica do Esclarecimento, que tem seu ?pice nas promessas essencialmente iluministas. Ao abordarem de maneira sucinta e ?mpar a origem do logos ocidental, perceberam que a genealogia do conhecimento, o seu n?cleo central, est? na necessidade dram?tica e incontrol?vel do ser humano se autoafirmar perante as for?as da natureza que imp?em medo. Por isso, o conceito de esclarecimento n?o pode ser compreendido somente ? luz do s?culo XVIII e de suas deriva??es otimistas. Para os autores, no mito j? havia um conhecimento intuitivo e explicativo, de algum modo insepar?vel do pensamento esclarecedor. Este visava dar explica??es e justificativas sobre os acontecimentos da rela??o do ser humano com a natureza. Portanto, a cada resist?ncia na tentativa de domina??o da natureza, o ser humano vai aumentando seu potencial, sua for?a e seu poder sobre ela. Assim, o ponto de partida da Dial?tica do Esclarecimento ? uma cr?tica ? sociedade iluminista e ? racionalidade moderna que se tornou instrumental. Para Adorno e Horkheimer devemos perceber os limites da modernidade, da raz?o e da ci?ncia, os aspectos mais sutis e agressivos que j? estavam presentes na rela??o rec?proca dial?tica entre mito e esclarecimento. Embora o tema abordado racionalidade dial?tica entre mito e esclarecimento constitua o percurso desta disserta??o, ? importante recolocarmos a quest?o que os autores fazem: por que a humanidade est? se afundando em uma nova esp?cie de barb?rie? Frente a este questionamento eles investigam e aprofundam de forma cr?tica o conhecimento estrat?gico e instrumental que se tornou mecanismo de poder e repress?o. Com a tese de que o mito ? esclarecimento e o esclarecimento se transformou em mitologia, mostram, ainda, que a racionalidade moderna, sob as luzes da raz?o, tem seu germe de regress?o por toda a parte. A pesquisa se desenvolve em tr?s momentos: o primeiro cap?tulo compreende o contexto e as fontes das principais quest?es filos?ficas da obra Dial?tica do Esclarecimento; o segundo exp?e Ulisses como o prot?tipo do homem moderno a partir do excurso I; por fim, no ?ltimo cap?tulo aborda-se a racionalidade dial?tica entre o mito e o esclarecimento.

Made available in DSpace on 2015-04-14T14:48:28Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 390589.pdf: 554095 bytes, checksum: 4a6018aa6d7bf40221c3f605d7bd9810 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2006-12-21 / Na presente pesquisa, vinculada ? linha de pesquisa Cultura e Viol?ncia, que est? inserida na ?rea de concentra??o Viol?ncia do Mestrado em Ci?ncias Criminais da Faculdade de Direito da Pontif?cia Universidade Cat?lica do Rio Grande do Sul realiza-se uma an?lise cr?tica na forma pelo qual os meios de comunica??o de massa abordam as quest?es referentes a criminalidade. Banalizada por este prisma, a disserta??o vai buscar as teorias da Comunica??o Social, Filosofia, Direito e naquelas que procuram sustentar a verdadeira situa??o da criminalidade vigente no Pa?s, uma verifica??o sobre esta dr?stica interven??o dos meios de comunica??o de massa na realidade social, a qual influencia e altera o comportamento dos homens que acabam tornando em "opini?o p?blica", o que na verdade ? uma "opini?o privada". Ainda, neste estudo pretende-se demosntrar a fun??o da m?dia socialidade, a realidade que a mesma constr?i acerca da criminalidade, e o interece de tratar a quest?o como uma esp?cie de "paravento" de problemas pol?ticos, sociais e econ?micos. Diante disso a pesquisa demosntra a influ?ncia cultural da m?dia na forma??o de opini?o dos seus consumidores quando se aborda a criminalidade, demonstrando assim, a vincula??o direta do presente estudo com a ?rea de concentra??o e com a linha de pesquisa apresentada.

Submitted by Setor de Tratamento da Informa??o - BC/PUCRS (tede2@pucrs.br) on 2015-04-24T13:38:48Z No. of bitstreams: 1 467621 - Texto Completo.pdf: 1459509 bytes, checksum: 3995f0881eecaa787a419bff819653b6 (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2015-04-24T13:38:48Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 467621 - Texto Completo.pdf: 1459509 bytes, checksum: 3995f0881eecaa787a419bff819653b6 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2015-03-05 / Coordena??o de Aperfei?oamento de Pessoal de N?vel Superior - CAPES / This research deals with a central question in philosophy: the problem of foundation. Although the concept of philosophical foundation has undergone profound transformations throughout history, it including the loss of their metaphysical, ontological and theological references, the underlying question to the theme remains the same: the search for rational grounds legitimating of thought and action. After the "Copernican turn" in philosophy undertaken by Kant and the pragmatic-linguistic turn in contemporary philosophy the question of foundation can to express as way follows: what is the transcendental element that is the practical attitude of human? In order to answer this question we will concentrate on the analysis of the thought of two great philosophers of contemporary: Theodor Adorno and J?rgen Habermas. In the meantime, we are dedicated to also examine the concept of rationality of each of these authors, as well as its normative statement of proposals of ethics. We wonder what is the model of reason more apt to examine the normative nature of issues and gnostic of our time, marked on the one hand, the technical prestige and technological sciences, which causes an instrumental view prevails human, on the other hand, often by perniciosa- influenced the mass media, which together with the deficit in the educational and cultural level prevents the full realization of the concept of majority (M?ndigkeit) as telos of individual and collective life as the promised Enlightenment. Our thesis is that dialectical reason developed by Adorno presents itself as a more comprehensive and effective proposal to equate these and other issues of our historic time. / Esta pesquisa versa sobre uma quest?o central na filosofia: o problema da fundamenta??o. Ainda que o conceito de fundamenta??o filos?fica tenha sofrido profundas metamorfoses ao longo da hist?ria, incluindo a perda de suas refer?ncias metaf?sicas, ontol?gicas e teol?gicas, a querela subjacente ao tema continua a mesma: a busca das bases racionais legitimadoras do pensamento e da a??o. Tendo em vista a ?virada copernicana? na filosofia empreendida por Kant e a reviravolta pragm?tico-lingu?stica na filosofia contempor?nea, a quest?o da fundamenta??o deixa-se expressar nos seguintes termos: qual ? o elemento transcendental que reside na atitude pr?tica do homem? Com o objetivo de responder a essa pergunta nos deteremos na an?lise do pensamento de dois grandes fil?sofos da contemporaneidade: Theodor Adorno e J?rgen Habermas. Nesse ?nterim, dedicamo-nos a examinar tamb?m o conceito de racionalidade de cada um desses autores, assim como suas propostas de fundamenta??o normativa da ?tica. Perguntamo-nos qual ? o modelo de raz?o mais apto a examinar as quest?es de natureza normativas e gnosiol?gicas de nossa ?poca, marcada, de um lado, pelo prest?gio da t?cnica e das ci?ncias tecnol?gicas, que faz com que prevale?a uma vis?o instrumental e praticista do homem, e por outro lado, pela influ?ncia? frequentemente perniciosa? dos meios de comunica??o de massa, que aliados ? semiforma??o no plano pedag?gico e cultural impede a plena realiza??o do conceito de maioridade (M?ndigkeit) enquanto telos da vida individual e coletiva como prometia o Iluminismo. A nossa tese ? a de que a raz?o dial?tica desenvolvida por Adorno se apresenta como uma proposta mais abrangente e eficaz para equacionar essas e outras quest?es de nosso momento hist?rico.

This thesis seeks to trace domination theory back to the influential work done by Marx on commodity fetishism. Marx's work proves to be an original account of domination that explains how the dominated many accept the rule of the privileged few. The theory of commodity fetishism develops the idea that individuals come to adopt beliefs that bolster and reproduce the status quo of capitalism. For Marx, the way that individuals experience capitalism is different from the way that it actually works because, in fact, lived experience is actually false. Oppression, inequality and exploitation are thus hidden and the main source of conflict between the oppressed many and the privileged few is obscured. I seek to develop this insight of Marx's into a more comprehensive account of how dominating capitalism self maintains. Lukács' theory of reification explains how capitalism has become all-embracing because capitalism has developed its own type of rationality. This specific rationality shapes thought, which in turn, generates false beliefs that favour the continuation of the status quo. Horkheimer and Adorno argue that capitalism extends its influence by means of its deep involvement in modern culture. Today, culture has become an massive industry which inculcates the logic and principles of capitalism into individuals. For these theorists, capitalism has penetrated all areas of life; experience, knowledge and thought have become extensions of capitalism itself. Marx, Lukács, Horkheimer and Adorno give accounts of how false beliefs are put into practice. Hence the importance of the work of Bourdieu. Bourdieu's theory of distinction describes how the status quo in capitalism is maintained by the behaviour of individuals through their daily acts of consumption. I argue that the consumption of commodities reproduces the status quo in two ways: firstly, establishing an upper-class which takes the lead in patterns of consumption, and, secondly, by creating a middle class that follows its example. Finally, I relate Bourdieu's insights to the theories of Marx, Lukács, Horkheimer and Adorno and Bourdieu in order to arrive at a more inclusive account of how.

A questão agrária acompanha a história do país, marca a base da organização da sociedade brasileira e permanece distante de ser resolvida. Tendo como pano de fundo essa questão, vários movimentos sociais surgiram ao longo da história, inclusive aquele que é considerado hoje o mais importante e vigoroso movimento social que luta pela transformação da sociedade: o Movimento dos Trabalhadores Rurais Sem-Terra (MST). Neste trabalho, pretendemos observar as relações que se estabelecem dentro do movimento social, em sua atuação concreta em um assentamento de reforma agrária, analisando os aspectos que contribuem e os que atrapalham o desenvolvimento de práticas emancipatórias e a construção de uma nova sociedade, utilizando para isso a psicologia social de T.W. Adorno. Como metodologia de pesquisa, optamos por uma abordagem qualitativa, um estudo de caso. Os dados indicam que frente à totalidade reinante nesta sociedade, o MST se constitui em uma possibilidade de que os indivíduos tenham uma experiência (Erfahrung), ou seja, que se coloquem de uma maneira reflexiva frente ao mundo administrado, que tenham uma possibilidade de desenvolvimento do pensamento não tutelado e questionador, ao mesmo tempo em que criam um conteúdo coletivo e um significado partilhado para suas ações. Por outro lado, com a entrada da lógica da mercadoria e do princípio do equivalente no assentamento, a vivência (Erlebnis) tende a tomar o lugar da experiência (Erfahrung), e os indivíduos tendem a voltar a se adaptar ao mundo administrado, o que causa uma série de rompimentos e desencontros. Isso, somado ao ingresso dos agentes estatais no assentamento, faz com que o MST passe a ter dificuldade de manter sua influência junto aos assentados, o que pode levá-lo a assumir uma postura que incentiva a adesão não refletida aos seus princípios e, portanto, remete ao pensamento em bloco, à mentalidade do ticket. Finalizamos salientando que para o MST continuar contribuindo para a emancipação dos sujeitos no assentamento, deve atentar para a importância da autodeterminação e da liberdade dos indivíduos, problematizando o já dado, explicitando as contradições e fomentando a construção de espaços coletivos que contribuam com o esclarecimento, com a autonomia. / The property of the land question is a permanent issue in the history of the country. It characterizes the basis of the organization of the Brazilian society, and remains as an issue far from being solved. Having this question as a background, several social movements have emerged. Among them, there is one which today is considered the most important and vigorous social movement struggling for a change in society; that is the Landless Rural Workers Movement (Movimento dos Trabalhadores Rurais Sem-Terra MST). This study attempts to observe the relations that are established within the social movement, in its concrete action in a land reform settlement. It will also analyze the different aspects that contribute or hinder the development of their emancipation and the construction of a new society. This study is based on the social psychology theories of Theodor Wiesengrund Adorno. As a methodology of research, a qualitative approach and case study were used. All informations, gathered through interviews and practical observation, indicate that in relation to the reigning totality in this society, the MST has become a possibility in which the individuals may have a experience (Erfahrung). This is to say, that these individuals assumed a reflective position in relation to the administered world, and that they had the possibility of developing their own thinking and questioning. At the same time, they created a collective content and a shared meaning for their activities. On the other hand, with the upcoming of the logic of merchandise and the equivalent principle in the settlement, the apprehension of reality (Erlebnis) tends to take the place of experience (Erfahrung) and the individuals tend to go back and adapt themselves to the administered world. This fact causes a series of misunderstanding and ruptures. In addition, the participation of government representatives in this new reality of the settlement, causes problems to the MST. The Movement has difficulties in keeping its influence on the settler. Such a situation may take the MST to assume a position which leads to non-reflective actions not in agreement with its principles, and therefore leads to mass thinking, the so-called ballot mentality. To finish up, the study emphasizes that the MST should continue to contribute towards the emancipation of the individual in the settlement; it should ponder the importance of autodetermination and freedom, pointing out the real cause of problems; it should explain all contradictions; and it should motivate the construction of collective spaces which will contribute to enlightenment, and lead to more autonomy.

Abstract not available