Nythamar De Oliveira

O artigo procura mostrar em que sentido a democracia deliberativa proposta pelateoria discursiva de Jürgen Habermas dá conta do problema dos reducionismos econômicose juridificantes da mundialização ou globalização, entendida como uma colonização técnico-sistêmica do mundo da vida. Recorrendo a sua concepção de um ethos democráticotransnacional embasado na soberania popular, a teoria habermasiana logra resgatar ocaráter normativo da mundialização através da irredutibilidade de valores humanos como aliberdade, a dignidade e os direitos humanos, inerentes às mais diferentes e incompatíveisautocompreensões de mundos da vida.

The goal of this paper is to show that the Kantian correlation beween universalizability and humanity addresses the communitarian critique by resorting to the positive identification between human rights and fundamental rights and to the normative conception of moral persons, irreducible in theirhuman dignity. I argue for what may be termed a transcendental-semantic perspectivism that allows for a more reasonable, sustainable defense of cosmopolitanism than previous accounts of universalist and communitarian models.

This book focuses on the genealogy of modernity as it has been articulated by the original contributions of Kant, Nietzsche, and Foucault, in their respective conceptions of truth, power, and ethics. The author seeks to show that in order to articulate a philosophical discourse on modernity one must not only refer to cultural, historical events associated with modern conceptions of truth, power, and ethics, but also undertake an analysis of how these different axes concur to determine what we call "modernity." Such is in effect the genealogical thrust of this study, which is explicitly based upon Foucault's readings of Kant and Nietzsche, so as to show that critique and genealogy constitute a highly original contribution of Foucault's social philosophy to the study of modernity. The "genealogy of modernity" is shown to constitute the major thesis of a Foucauldian "philosophical discourse of modernity" which, contrary to Habermas's criticisms, does not evade questions of truth, normativity, and value, but rather contradict them. The genealogy of modernity is itself made possible by the articulation of the three axes of truth, power, and ethics that determine the historical a priori of our modern ethos as the condition of who we are, that is, the formation of modern subjectivity with its regimes of veridiction and jurisdiction, modes of subjectivation and practices of freedom.

Kant’s dualism in anthropology and morality is said to be bridged only by means of a teleologywhich seems to betray the historical constitution of its subjectivity. And yet the Kantianarticulation of problems of theoretical and practical reason can be explored only insofar asthey help us understand the correlated problems of the unity of reason, the relation of aestheticsand ethics in the light of the three Critiques, and the teleological conception of history.In this paper, I argue for a teleological reading of the systematic architectonic so as tomake sense of the concept of purposiveness as the a priori principle of judgment in its logical,aesthetic, and teleological reflection and of the unifying, a priori principles of each faculty–namely, conformity to law, final purpose, and conformity to purpose or purposiveness(Gesetzmäßigkeit, Endzweck, Zweckmäßigkeit) – respectively dealt with in the three Critiques.