Este artículo discute y analiza la formación del carácter crítico e intelectual en Rafael Gutiérrez Girardot. A partir de fuentes diversas y, en parte, inexploradas, se reconstruye el proceso de formación y ejercicio de su actividad crítica entre 1950 y 1965. Se tienen en cuenta tanto las relaciones con otros intelectuales como la influencia de los diversos contextos en los cuales se dieron dichas relaciones. Así, su participación en Cuadernos Hispanoamericanos, su correspondencia con Alfonso Reyes y con Nils Hedberg, su (...) actividad diplomática, su trabajo editorial y de traducción y, finalmente, su práctica docente, se estudian con objeto de tener un marco comprensivo. La obra crítica de Gutiérrez Girardot dista de estar comprendida y, de hecho, se precisa todavía de un exhaustivo trabajo de reconstrucción y análisis. This paper discusses and analyses the critical and intellectual nature of the work of Rafael Gutiérrez Girardot. It reproduces the process of construction and exercise of his critical activity (1950-1965), based on different sources some of them not yet very studied. The paper takes into account his relationships with other intellectuals and the influence of its different contexts. Thus, in order to get a comprehensive framework, it studies his participation in Cuadernos Hispanoamericanos, his correspondence with Alfonso Reyes and Nils Hedberg, his diplomatic activity, his work as editor and translator and finally his teaching experience. The critical work of Gutiérrez Girardot is far from being completely interpreted and this makes necessary an exhaustive work of reconstruction and analysis. (shrink)

Although the French Renaissance sceptic Michel de Montaigne is a much-admired thinker among many literary historians and some philosophical ones, his oeuvre hardly features in critical surveys of ideas in education. This is strange given that Montaigne offers modern educators an exemplary form of communicative discourse which anticipates contemporary education theory's emphasis on the importance of reflective practice and learning from experience. While each of these themes is capable of being rendered as repetitious slogans, sound-bites even, Montaigne, through his emphasis (...) on free thinking and self-study, helps to rescue them from such a fate, identifying a dialectical method called ‘essaying’ which has genuine purchase on practice and its improvement. (shrink)

Is the essay literature or philosophy? A form of art or a form of knowledge? The contemporary essay is torn between its belletrist ancestry and its claim to philosophical legitimacy. The Spanish philosopher Eduardo Nicol captured the genre's uncertain status when he dubbed it “almost literature and almost philosophy” (Nicol 1961:207). The problem is hardly a new one. It goes back to what Plato called the “ancient quarrel” between poetry and philosophy, and more recently to the German Romantic theorist, Friedrich (...) Schlegel, who called for a mode of criticism which would be at once philosophical and poetic. But today, when the status of critical discourse is up for grabs, reflecting the crisis of knowledge in the universities, the question of the essay takes on a new urgency. Now the predominant form of writing in the human sciences, it cannot avoid the challenge to define itself according to the prevailing standards of scientific knowledge and method. (shrink)

RESUMO O texto propõe, inicialmente, uma aproximação entre as visões de Aristóteles e Montaigne sobre a virtude da coragem, com especial atenção ao problema da morte heroica. Então, são apresentados alguns pontos de diferenciação do filósofo francês em relação ao legado aristotélico para, enfim, mostrar que uma das restrições especificamente montaignianas sobre a legitimidade de um ato de coragem acarreta uma limitação à ação do próprio Estado, o que deve ser julgado um elemento essencial à formação do pensamento político moderno. (...) ABSTRACT At first, the article proposes an approximation between Aristotle's and Montaigne's views on the virtue of courage, with special attention to the problem of heroic death. Then, some distinguishing points of the French philosopher from the Aristotelian legacy are presented, in order to show, finally, that one of the specifically Montaignean restrictions on the legitimacy of an act of courage entails a limitation to the action of the State itself; which must be considered an essential element to the shaping of Modern political thought. (shrink)