Davide Scarso

In one of the working notes from the Visible and the Invisible, Merleau-Ponty expresses the intention of resuming his critique of Lévi-Strauss ‘s notion of Gestatung in a future version of the text. The recent publication of the notes from the course at College de France (1954-55), and particularly the first of them regarding “L ‘institution dans ľhistoire personelle et publique”, allows a more thorough understanding of that otherwise rather obscure reference. In this paper, we track Merleau-Ponty’s critique of the anthropologist’s theory of history in the courses on institution as well as in other texts of the sarne period (and particularly relevant is the reference to Les aventures de la dialectique). The French philosopher pursues a conceptual path that may move beyond the radical relativism professed by the Lévi-Strauss, which is nothing but a supplement of natural objectivism, and aims at a “ relativization of the relative”. We thus see how Merleau-Ponty focuses this question on the notion of “historical” and “social” perception, suggesting a “ perceptive” reading of the categories proposed by Lévi-Strauss. We believe that this particular phase of the merleau-pontyan reflection on history is a step of the greater importance in the theoretical path towards the ontological inquiries of his last works.

The aim of this essay is to connect the notion of the Anthropocene with Merleau-Pontyan thought by drawing on two aspects of the author’s ontological reflection. First, I consider “the event of the Anthropocene” as an event that is part of an instituting dynamic, in reference to the ontological dimension of “Institution” that Merleau-Ponty borrows from Husserl and develops in an original way in his 1954-1955 lectures at the Collège de France. I then underline the difficulties that arise when multiple names are employed to designate our “current geological era” in debates on the Anthropocene, a complex global event with political, ethical, and social dimensions. To conclude, I show that this multiplication of names is constitutive of the event of the Anthropocene. The Merleau-Pontyan idea of “a theme that constitutes itself through its variations,” introduced by Mauro Carbone in his work on sensible ideas and the “arche-screen” and closely linked to the element of “Institution,” can help us find philosophical advancements at the heart of this contemporary naming debate.

The aim of this essay is to connect the notion of the Anthropocene with Merleau-Pontyan thought by drawing on two aspects of the author’s ontological reflection. First, I consider “the event of the Anthropocene” as an event that is part of an instituting dynamic, in reference to the ontological dimension of “Institution” that Merleau-Ponty borrows from Husserl and develops in an original way in his 1954-1955 lectures at the Collège de France. I then underline the difficulties that arise when multiple names are employed to designate our “current geological era” in debates on the Anthropocene, a complex global event with political, ethical, and social dimensions. To conclude, I show that this multiplication of names is constitutive of the event of the Anthropocene. The Merleau-Pontyan idea of “a theme that constitutes itself through its variations,” introduced by Mauro Carbone in his work on sensible ideas and the “arche-screen” and closely linked to the element of “Institution,” can help us find philosophical advancements at the heart of this contemporary naming debate.

The aim of this essay is to connect the notion of the Anthropocene with Merleau-Pontyan thought by drawing on two aspects of the author’s ontological reflection. First, I consider “the event of the Anthropocene” as an event that is part of an instituting dynamic, in reference to the ontological dimension of “Institution” that Merleau-Ponty borrows from Husserl and develops in an original way in his 1954-1955 lectures at the Collège de France. I then underline the difficulties that arise when multiple names are employed to designate our “current geological era” in debates on the Anthropocene, a complex global event with political, ethical, and social dimensions. To conclude, I show that this multiplication of names is constitutive of the event of the Anthropocene. The Merleau-Pontyan idea of “a theme that constitutes itself through its variations,” introduced by Mauro Carbone in his work on sensible ideas and the “arche-screen” and closely linked to the element of “Institution,” can help us find philosophical advancements at the heart of this contemporary naming debate.

A arquitetura fenomenológica não possui talvez a solidez e a homogeneidade de uma escola ou de um movimento em sentido estrito, mas representa, no entanto, um vetor notável do pensamento arquitetônico contemporâneo. Juntamente com as obras de Heidegger, as obras de Merleau-Ponty são utilizadas com frequência por aqueles que se reconhecem como representantes de uma arquitetura de inspiração fenomenológica. Neste artigo será analisado o papel que o pensamento de Merleau-Ponty desenrola nas obras e no pensamento de Juhani Pallasmaa e Steven Holl, autores que se destacam pela força de seus trabalhos e pela determinação de suas posições teóricas. Particular atenção se prestará à dupla oposição que caracteriza a arquitetura fenomenológica, que se distancia com igual firmeza tanto do modernismo como do pós-modernismo. Estes autores, na reivindicação da primazia do corpo vivido e da experiência perceptiva, consideram ter encontrado um “antídoto” à ossificação produzida pela racionalidade moderna, com seus espaços funcionais e inabitáveis, como também à celebração da autorreferencialidade de um certo pós-modernismo, com seus edifícios destinados essencialmente a serem contemplados pelos apreciadores. A partir dessa dupla oposição, a arquitetura fenomenológica parece procurar um plano mais sólido numa forte acentuação da positividade da experiência corpórea e perceptiva, quando Merleau-Ponty parece empenhado, pelo contrário, em uma progressiva revisão destes aspetos.