Fernando Silva

Partindo da inequívoca assumpção de que há um espírito comum entre Platão e o período do idealismo alemão, o presente ensaio propõe-se comprovar esta mesma tese analisando o conjunto de anotações intitulado “Über den Geist der Platonischen Philosophie”, coligido por Schelling ainda na fase pré-filosófica da sua evolução espiritual, em 1793. Da análise deste, e dos dois mitos aí contidos, esperase por sua vez que estes nos possam fornecer fortes indícios não só do quadro histórico-mitológico que está por detrás de toda a filosofia idealista, mas também da possibilidade de que destes mitos nasçam os primeiros frémitos da primeiríssima filosofia de Schelling.

ABSTRACT The question of human consciousness is a crucial part of Novalis’ aim of construing a self-critique of the I, or critique of human identity, as it is proposed in his “Fichte-Studien”. Namely, this question is an intermediary stage in said critique, serving as proof for Novalis’ theory of the opposites, the fundamental stage, and his position on philosophizing, the final stage of this endeavor, which will be at the basis of his whole philosophical system; and as such, it is a topic of great importance, as it is not only a link in a chain of thought which aims at proving the organicity or living heterogeneity - and not Fichte’s machine-like homogeneity - of the human but is also a key topic towards the resolution of Novalis’problem of philosophy as an existential problem. Given this, the present article intends to situate the question of human consciousness in the framework of Novalis’greater scope of a critique of the I; and from then, to comment on Novalis’own position on the problem of human consciousness, as it is stated in the formula “Consciousness is the Being outside of Being, within Being”; a position which further separates the young poet from Fichte, as it renders him closer and closer to other young idealists, such as Hölderlin or Schelling. RESUMO A questão da consciência humana é uma parte crucial no intento novaliano de construir uma autocrítica do Eu, ou crítica da identidade humana, como ela é proposta nos seus “Fichte-Studien”. Designadamente, esta questão constitui um estado intermédio em tal crítica, servindo como prova da teoria dos contrários de Novalis, o estádio fundamental desta, e a posição de Novalis sobre o filosofar, o estádio final da sua empresa, a qual está na base de todo o seu sistema filosófico; e, como tal, é um tópico de grande importância, visto ser não só um elo em uma linha de pensamento que visa provar a organicidade ou heterogeneidade viva - e não a maquinal homogeneidade de Fichte - do humano, mas também um tópico-chave tendo em vista a resolução da questão novaliana da filosofia enquanto problema existencial. Assim sendo, o presente artigo propõe-se situar a questão da consciência humana no contexto maior da crítica da identidade de Novalis; e, a partir daí, comentar a posição de Novalis sobre o problema da consciência humana, como ele surge exposto na fórmula “A consciência é o Ser fora do Ser, no Ser”; uma posição que decisivamente separa o jovem poeta de Fichte, enquanto o aproxima de outros jovens idealistas, tais como Hölderlin ou Schelling.

A justificativa para um trabalho de análise epistemológica das pesquisas-ações deve-se ao caráter desse método de pesquisa, ciência emergente que possui base dupla, uma ancorada no senso comum e a outra na justificação pela comunidade cientifica. O objetivo da pesquisa é estudar um conjunto específico de pesquisas selecionadas, identificando e analisando suas apropriações ou ressignificações e indicar as tendências e as potencialidades que se apresentam à área de educação frente a esse tipo de pesquisa. Os resultados da análise dos trabalhos indicam que os problemas apontados e suas soluções expressas em intervenções são realizados sem uma recuperação histórica da dinâmica do local de estudo.

Between 1795 and 1796 Novalis produces a vast group of fragments on Fichte’s philosophy, the posthumously entitled “Fichte-Studien”. Among the topics therein approached, one of the most important is that of the _original action of the I _, and _the possible or impossible union of the opposites which model human life and thought_, feeling and reflection. The aim of this article is to inquire Novalis’ view of this problem of paramount importance for a philosophy of the I; namely, to investigate the contours of Novalis’ circular conception of the problem, and its differences regarding Fichte; to expound the dilemma of the necessity and yet impossibility of a union between opposites; and to show how the young philosopher considers this problem both in its real and in its ideal prism, thereby proposing, as a solution, a _union in disunion_, an _possible union between opposites_, which Novalis affirms as a new conception of the circular study of the I and as the foundation for a new philosophizing.

The main point of our study is that the Kantian problem of a suitability between theory and practice, one of the key issues in Kant’s practical thinking in general, was erroneously perceived not only by those who defended it, and conceived of its possibility, but also by those who denied it and defended its impossibility. Our position, conversely, is that Kant, upon approaching a seemingly irresoluble problem, was forced to conceive of a via media, an “intermediate member of connection” between theory and practice; an alternative which, in our view, does not arise out of mere necessity, rather is intimately interconnected from the mid-1770s onwards with the formation of Kant’s fundamental scheme of human knowledges, a scheme which, in its tridimensionality, establishes Pragmatic Anthropology as a third dimension of human knowledge and therefore as the only suitable soil for the dialogue between theory and practice, beyond the mere possibility or impossibility of the problem. This proposition, we hope, will enable us to ascertain what Kant envisages by the “talent of nature”, the special “act of the power of judgment” that is to serve as connecting member between theory and practice; to explain how Anthropology is to be seen as the natural abode for this mediating interplay; and, finally, to better position, as well as delimit, the scope of Kant’s anthropo-cosmological view of Man in the World, which is to be seen precisely between the merely rational of theory and the merely empirical of practice.

The present article seeks to inquire the nature of Novalis’ difficult relation with philosophy. By founding this relation in a primordial spiritual conflict, wherein philosophy is the cause and the solution for the latter, as well as in an inescapable mythical understanding, wherein philosophy is at the same time necessary, and yet necessarily expendable, we intend to prove Novalis’ own seemingly contradictory, yet infinitely productive concept of philosophizing: one where philosophizing is a ductile, organic way of dealing with the problem between the human being and the absolute. Furthermore, we wish to prove how this is most visibly considered in the sub-problem of the origin of philosophy, which sets the tone for Novalis’ remaining philosophical edifice and inscribes him as one of the leading opposers of a systematic philosophy – and hence, as an advocator of the impossibility of attaining the absolute through philosophy.

Among the many stages of Kant’s problem of a reciprocal collocation of the human knowledges, Encyclopedism, quite unsurprisingly, is one of the most relevant; and yet, quite surprisingly, it is Anthropology which plays here one of the lead parts, insofar as the complex ascertainment of its definition, its position, its task proves to be of irrefutable importance towards solving the greater problem at hand. The question arises as the association – or dissociation – between Empirical Psychology and Pragmatic Anthropology, and their inclusion in, or exclusion from, their greater or lesser relation with Metaphysics; a problem which, to the careless eye, seems to have been promoted by Kant himself. Here, opinions diverge as to the nature of the relation between the two sciences, from their total inter-dependence to their complete separation. We, in turn, propose a different approach. Our objective is to reenact Kant’s fundamental scheme of human knowledges, as presented not only in the only extant Lecture on Encyclopedism, but in various others dimensions of Kant’s academic activity; and here, to propose a contrasting analysis between Empirical Psychology and Pragmatic Anthropology; one, however, based not on the assumption of their consonance or dissonance through their characteristics, rather on their respective position and scope amid the field of human knowledges. As such, it is our intention to consider Kant’s Lectures in their interconnection, namely, in their apparently dubious simultaneous collocation of an Empirical Psychology as Anthropology; and, based on their specific position in the scheme of human knowledges, and what this position entails in terms of their scope and task, to ascertain to what extent Empirical Psychology is indeed Anthropology, and from what extent Empirical Psychology is no longer Anthropology – not, at least, Pragmatic Anthropology. In other words, we shall labor towards defining a dividing line in Kant’s scheme of human knowledges; one which for Kant represents a third dimension of knowledge and stands between rational and empirical, Metaphysics and the historical sciences; that line, in our view, being that of a cosmopolitical prism. Keywords: Kant, encyclopedism, anthropology, empirical psychology, cosmopolitanism.

RESUMO Seguindo a elevação de outros dons naturais do espírito humano a categorias ou princípios estéticos, o que ocorreria gradualmente durante o século XVIII, o génio e as suas várias problemáticas tornam-se uma das mais prementes questões na agenda filosófica da época. Entre outros, a questão assume particular relevância na filosofia de Immanuel Kant, e isso não apenas na sua obra publicada, mas também na sua actividade como Professor. O presente texto propõe-se abordar a questão do génio nas lições de antropologia do filósofo, e, tomando isto como ensejo, cumprir dois objectivos centrais: em primeiro lugar, traçar uma brevíssima história do conceito desde o século XVII até Kant, a fim de perceber que emprego desta faria o filósofo, e como ele próprio se associa ou dissocia desta. Segundo, compreender o modo como, dada a sua percepção histórica do termo, a teoria do génio em Kant trilha um curso singular, distinto em relação ao dos seus contemporâneos, e que faz com que o génio ostente uma posição central no seio da sua própria teoria; pois, na visão de Kant, o génio não só desempenha um importante papel como mediador das faculdades do ânimo humano, como é ainda peça indispensável na boa proporção entre estes e na insuspeitada produção de conhecimento por isto gerada. ABSTRACT Following the ascension of other natural gifts of the human spirit to the condition of categories or aesthetic principles, which would occur gradually during the 18th century, the topic of genius and its various issues becomes one of the most important questions in the philosophical agenda of the time. Among others, the question assumes particular relevance in Immanuel Kant's philosophy, not only in his published work, but also in his activity as a professor. The following text intends to approach the question of genius in the philosopher's Lectures on Anthropology, and taking the latter into account, to fulfil two central objectives: first, to etch a brief history of the concept from the 17th century until Kant, so as to realize what use Kant would make of this evolution, and how he himself associates or dissociates from it. Secondly, we intend to understand how Kant's theory of genius describes its own singular course, different from the ones of his contemporaries, and renders the genius a central piece within his own theory; for, in Kant's view, the genius not only plays an important role as mediator of the faculties of the spirit, but it is also an indispensable factor in the proportion between the latter, and in the unsuspected production of knowledge thus generated.

Emergentes não raras vezes nas Lições de Antropologia de Kant, os termos “Einbildungskraft”, “Einbildungsfähigkeit” e “Imagination” são comummente tomados – e, prova maior disto mesmo, traduzidos – como um só. O presente artigo propõe-se pôr em causa e demonstrar a incorrecção desta abordagem. Bem pelo contrário, estamos em crer que, no âmbito da antropologia kantiana, em primeiro lugar, “faculdade de imaginação” e “capacidade de imaginação” não são uma e a mesma coisa, antes significam diferentes estratos, diferentes dimensões conceptuais na compreensão do processo de representação humana; em segundo lugar, também “faculdade de imaginação”, enquanto “Einbildungskraft”, não é o mesmo que o seu correspondente na “Imagination”, antes duas dimensões de um e o mesmo problema antropológico, o problema por excelência do acto de representar, que surge entre o mundo e o designar humano. Tais distinções, que, assim o cremos, requerem uma compreensão mas também uma tradução mais criteriosa do que até aqui, trazem a uma mais distinta luz o modo como Kant estrutura e ordena as diferentes fases do processo da imaginação humana, e salienta aquelas que, para o filósofo, são as diferentes potencialidades desta última.__.

Trata-se de uma resenha das obras Sobrinho de Rameau de Denis Diderot, Sobre a Verdade e Mentira no sentido Extra-Moral de Friedrich Nietzsche e A construção das ciências: introdução à filosofia e á ética das ciências de Gerárd Fourez. Os textos foram lidos com base nas seguintes questões: Quais são as bases de sustentação do conhecimento?; O que é a verdade e se é possível alcançá-la de forma objetiva; O que é a ciência e o que ela representa na busca pela verdade e o conhecimento? e Quais as possibilidades da linguagem na busca pelo conhecimento? Concluiu-se que o que Diderot caracteriza como idiotismo aparenta-se com os valores morais seguidos pelo instinto de rebanho nos indivíduos de Nietzsche. Para Fourez observar é sempre representar e na representação nunca se obtém do objeto sua verdadeira essência. Desconstruir conceitos, apreender o aspecto fluido e mutável das coisas e dos valores, seria essa a linha mestra dos textos tratados neste trabalho.

The topic of the ideal, that is, the topic of the possible or impossible human attainment of the absolute is ascribed divergent treatments throughout Kant’s work. Namely, it is either promptly accepted as possible by the critical Kant, and seen as something attainable by a means other than an infinite approximation (which would indeed imply a violation of autonomy, but denies the genuineness of the ideal), or it is rejected as impossible by the non-critical Kant, that is, it is seen as something attainable only through an infinite approximation (which would involve an unconditional acceptance of heteronomy, but safeguards the authenticity of an aspiration to the ideal). Yet, the topic of the ideal receives a new, if not conciliatory, at least mutually explanatory approach in Kant’s Anthropology. Here – such is our proposition – Kant proposes a terminus medius between both conceptions of ideal, insofar as he is led to ponder on the mutual benefits of an autonomic possibility and an heteronomic impossibility of an infinite progression in thought; something which Kant proposes under the form of an almost-infinite, or an almost perennial, yet finite duration, to be endured until the attainment of an almost unreachable, yet indeed reachable practical ideal. A terminus medius which, we hope to prove, is none other than that at the root of Kant’s proposition of Pragmatic Anthropology as a mediating science in Kant’s fundamental scheme of human knowledges, and which therefore may be ultimately seen as the embodiment of Kant’s anthropo-cosmological, or indeed cosmopolitical dimension of thought, as expressed in Kant’s political and/or historical writings.

Amid a period of isolation and profound internal conflict, both in his life and in his thought, arises that which, according to Hölderlin, is “the general conflict in the human being”, namely the conflict between the “aspiration to limitation” and “the aspiration to the absolute”. The aim of this article is to analyze and, as much as possible, follow to its fullest extent, this fundamental thought: to see how it molds Hölderlin’s positions on existence and philosophy, how it meets the most poignant philosophical concerns of the time and hence directly influences Hölderlin’s reading of Fichte, and how it leads the young poet to the notion of an infinite progression of philosophy, that is, to an infinite approximation to the ideal of knowledge.

This book presents a critical reconsideration of the Kantian cognitive and practical subject. Special attention is devoted to highlight the complex relation between subjectivity as it is presented in the three critiques and the way in which it is construed in other writings, in particular the Anthropology. While for Kant our cognitive apparatus and the structure of our will are common to all humans, the anthropological subject reveals degrees of variation, depending on a myriad of external circumstances that pose a challenge to the unity of Kant's account and await theoretical solutions. The essays collected in the volume delve into how the different shapes of human nature are not unrelated. They explore how and why different "Kantian subjects" are closely connected and at their core, if not entirely unified. The notions of personality, humanity, and citizenship will serve as leading threads for the reconstruction of this possible underlying unity. An engaging read that promises to deepen our understanding of human nature, the volume will be of great interest to scholars and researchers of philosophy, politics, psychology, social anthropology, ethics, and epistemology.

O presente artigo tem por objetivo caracterizar as duas fases do pensamento bachelardiano intituladas diurna e noturna e o modo como determinadas noções que permeiam essas duas etapas do pensamento do autor configuram uma comunicação recíproca entre si, fazendo com que haja uma troca assídua de valores entre ambas as vertentes. Deste modo, tentar-se-á demonstrar o quanto o fluxo de uma fase a outra de seu pensamento denota um sentido de completude ao invés de desconexão, negação ou mesmo oposição. Conceitos como descontinuidade, imagem e tempo orientarão nosso esforço em evidenciar tal complementariedade e aproximação entre as duas fases de pensamento de Gaston Bachelard.

The central aim of this essay is to portray Kant’s notion of Witz as it unfolds from his Lectures on Anthropology, in a decisive stage of his intellectual evolution. This aim is sub-divided into two parallel objectives: first, to sketch a brief history of the concept of Witz, thus showing how Witz came to evolve from having a rational connotation to having an imaginative connotation, and how it came to be a pregnant philosophical issue, as well as an aesthetic principle. Secondly, to show how Kant read that singular course in the evolution of Witz; how, in his view, Witz and the power of judgement, imagination, and intellect are indeed opposed, but also how there is a necessity to unite both opposing parts; a convergence which is not only advantageous for both parts, but serves a greater purpose: to create an unsuspected link between imagination and understanding, as well as between philosophy and poetry.