Un primer aspecto concierne a la praxis no-intencional y primaria del cuerpo propio. A ello se añade su condición de sostén para los valores sensibles de la comodidad y la salud, y de trampolín para valores espirituales cuyo nivel superior se encuentra en los valores éticos de la persona. Estos puntos de vista husserlianos encuentran nuevos desarrollos en la fenomenología: M. Henry pone el acento en un "yo puedo" pre-intencional, y Ricoeur describe el cuerpo propio como "fuente" de valores propios (...) y "resonador afectivo" de todos los valores, y a la vez esboza una concepción de la felicidad que incluye temples particulares de la corporalidad. Por último, Husserl considera la ofrenda del cuerpo propio a los valores espirituales en el sacrificio como la afirmación positiva de la vida de la humanidad. J. Patocka y E. Lévinas han desarrollado esta línea de pensamiento. A first aspect has to do with the non-intentional and primal praxis of the living body. To this is added its status as a support for the sensuous values of comfort and health and a springboard for spiritual values, the highest level of which lies in the ethical values of the person. These Husserlian views find new developments in phe-nomenology: M. Henry highlights a pre-intentional "I can", M. Scheler analyzes the relationship between hedonistic, vital, and spiritual values, and P. Ricoeur describes the living body both as the "source" ofits own proper values and the "affective resonator" of all values, and also outlines a view on happiness that encompasses particular bodily attunements. Finally, Husserl considers the offering of the living body to spiritual values in sacrifice as the positive assertion of humankind's life. J. Patocka and E. Lévinas have developed this line of thought. (shrink)

This paper aims to address the manner in which the protester’s opposition, or what I consider as the protester’s being-there-against, “profiles” itself in the no-man’s-land between non-violence and violence. My focus is therefore to unfold some of its constitutive layers, relying on the conceptual tools prominently provided by Ricoeur’s hermeneutical phenomenology. The first constitutive layer concerns the protester’s bodily presence, seized first of all as a specific “here” and “there,” and then as an expressive body that is communicating through gestures. (...) Within the interpretation of one of these gestures—the fist raised in the air—I highlight the anamnestic nature of the protester’s being-there-against as it appears in the relationship with a state whose legitimacy comes from taking over the monopoly on violence. The second constitutive layer is related to the linguistic dimension of the protester’s presence: here special attention is paid to the way language and violence connect, having as background an analysis devoted to the surplus and the deficit of meaning attached to the slogans chanted by the protesters. (shrink)

O artigo discute o problema da condição histórica em Levinas e Ricoeur tomando como fio condutor a relação entre ética e ontologia, bem como o papel da memória em história e em filosofia. O ponto de partida é a questão de Jan Patocka, em um livro intitulado Ensaios Heréticos: “A história tem um sentido?”. Diante da crise do sentido que caracteriza o mundo contemporâneo, procura-se mostrar que o não-sentido é uma possibilidade sempre iminente nas situações históricas, mas, para que isso (...) não seja a última palavra na interpretação de nossa humana condição, vale enfrentar a seguinte tarefa: retomar um confronto dialógico entre a crítica ética da ontologia e o desejo de ser, essencial em toda busca de sentido ou esforço hermenêutico .The paper examines the problem of the historical condition in Levinas and Ricoeur. The main issue is the relation between ethics and ontology, as well the role of memory in history and philosophy. The starting point is Patocka’s question in his book heretical essays: “does History have a meaning?” To answer this question we try to show that, in fact, the historical condition supposes a real possibility of non-meaning in every historical situation. Even so the search of meaning is a kind of philosophical task that implies a dialogue between the ethical critique to ontology and the desire of being , essential in each search of meaning or hermeneutical work. (shrink)

The main goal of my inquiry is to lay out the proximity between Patočka’s and Ricœur’s readings of Husserl’s Krisis and to stress the role played by the concept of the life-world in the unfolding of their original philosophical undertakings. In the first part, I show the importance both Patočka and Ricœur assignedto the Husserlian project of an “ontology of the life-world”. In the second part, I expose the criticism these two authors addressed to Husserl’s understanding of the life-world and, (...) more precisely, to the idea that the exploration of the life-world is merely another way of gaining access to transcendental subjectivity. In the last part, I show how the concrete descriptions of the life-world given by Patočka and Ricœur depart massively from the Husserlian perspective. (shrink)

This article embodies the result of a collective work that seeks to understand the manner in which the notion of conflict is transformed by the attempt to apply it to reality, according to the doctrines hereby comprise as “ontologies of conflict”. It seems that there are three resulting “logics of conflict” which may receive the following qualifications: logic of contradiction, logic of contrariety and logic of difference.

In this paper we will highlight the Hegelian heritage in Patočka and Ricœur’s thoughts. This heritage is particularly clear in their ideas of gift of self and of community bonding. The critical resumption of Hegel leads the two philosophers to discover some forms of recognition that overtake the struggle to the death, i.e. the two figures of the gift of self: the ceremonial gift and the authentic sacrifice. Patočka and Ricœur compare to Hegel also on the political thought. On one (...) side they agree with the idea of a conflictual origin of the community connections and of the institutions; on the other side they refuse every synthetic reconciliation, whether it is the hypostasis figure of the State or the absolute subjectivity. While preserving the tragic element of the history and of the historic human praxis, Patočka and Ricœur seem to analyze and overtake the Hegelian idea of struggle in the direction of a community connection which finds its foundation in the gift of self. (shrink)