This book provides practical and research-based chapters that offer greater clarity about the particular kinds of teacher reflection that matter and avoids talking about teacher reflection generically, which implies that all kinds of reflection are of equal value.

Like everyone with a scientific bent of mind, Dennett thinks our capacity for meaningful language and states of mind is the product of evolution (Dennett [1987, ch. VIII]). But unlike many of this bent, he sees virtue in viewing evolution itself from the intentional stance. From this stance, ?Mother Nature?, or the process of evolution by natural selection, bestows intentionality upon us, hence we are not Unmeant Meaners. Thus, our intentionality is extrinsic, and Dennett dismisses the theories of meaning of (...) Dretske, Fodor, Burge, Putnam, and Kripke on the grounds that each requires that our mental states, unlike those of artifacts, have meaning intrinsically. I argue that we are Unmeant Meaners, incidentally defending Dretske et al., though my goal is to test the explanatory virtue of the intentional stance as applied to the evolution of intentionality. (shrink)

Economics in general, and the theory of the firm more specifically, places motivation and cognition in very different analytical boxes, in spite of cognitive science evidence that the boundaries between the two are in reality blurred. While this analytical assumption has often served the theory of the firm well, a number of organizational phenomena are better understood if cognition and motivation are allowed to interact, for example, through framing effects, as organizational scholars have long argued. The paper exemplifies by developing (...) the implications of this for Williamson’s notion of the “impossibility of selective intervention.”théorie de la firme en particulier placent la motivation et la connaissance dans des boites analytiques très différentes, en dépit de preuves scientifiques affirmant que les deux se confondent dans la réalité. Même si cette hypothèse analytique a souvent été utile dans la théorie de la firme, certains phénomènes organisationnels sont mieux compris si on permet à la connaissance et à la motivation de réagir réciproquement, par exemple à travers des effets d’“encadrement ” comme les théoriciens des organisations le soutiennent depuis longtemps. Ce papier illustre cette interaction en développant les implications de l’effet d’encadrement pour la notion d’“impossibilité d’intervention sélective” de Williamson. (shrink)

This paper explores an alternative to the metaphysical challenge to physicalism posed by Jackson and Kripke and to the epistemological one exemplified by the positions of Nagel, Levine and Mcginn. On this alternative the mind-body gap is neither ontological nor epistemological, but semantic. I claim that it is because the gap is semantic that the mind body-problem is a quintessentially philosophical problem that is not likely to wither away as our natural scientific knowledge advances.

One of Israel Kirzner’s less wellknown contributions is to the theory of capital. In this paper, we link the Austrian theory of capital and the theory of economic organization. Our starting point is the key Austrian notion of capital heterogeneity which we interpret in terms of attributes. Most capital assets are multi-attribute in nature, and many attributes may not be known to entrepreneurs. This fosters a need for experimenting with capital combinations. Because there are costs of measuring attributes, this process (...) has implications for economic organization. Thus, we argue that novel implications for the understanding of ownership and the existence and boundaries of firms may be teased out of such a perspective.La théorie du capital représente une des contributions les moins connues d’Israel Kirzner. Dans cet article, nous établissons le lien entre la théorie autrichienne du capital et la théorie de l’organisation économique. Notre point de départ est la notion autrichienne fondamentale d’hétérogénéité du capital que nous interprétons en termes d’attributs. De par leur nature, la plupart des biens capitaux possèdent plusieurs attributs qui peuvent demeurer inconnus aux entrepreneurs. Ceci accroît la nécessité d’expérimenter des combinaisons capitalistiques. Etant donné les coûts qu’entraîne la mesure des attributs, ce processus a des implications quant à l’organisation économique. Ainsi, cette perspective permet de tirer de nouvelles implications pour notre compréhension de la propriété, de l’existence et de la taille des firmes. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:What Do You Mean, Rhetoric Is Epistemic?William D. HarpineIn 1967, Robert L. Scott (1967) advocated that "rhetoric is epistemic." This concept has enriched the work of rhetorical theorists and critics. Scott's essay is founded in a concept of argumentative justification in rhetoric, viewed as an alternative to analytic logic. Other writers, including Brummett (1976), Railsback (1983), and Cherwitz and Hikins (1986), have offered variations on Scott's theme. The thesis (...) that rhetoric is epistemic has been controversial, however, and from the tone of the debate one may draw two conclusions: many rhetorical theorists feel that Scott was on to something important, and the thesis as it has been developed is flawed. Much of the dispute centers on what the thesis means. These discussions have not yet adequately clarified that issue.The philosopher's most fundamental obligation is to define terms with care. It is in precisely this respect that the rhetoric-is-epistemic theorists have fallen short. Some of the key terms in this literature include rhetoric, knowledge, certainty, and truth. In too many cases, the writers on rhetorical epistemology have not defined their key terms at all. In other cases, their definitions are inadequate or inconsistent. This essay undertakes to sort out the most important definitional problems, which center on the rhetoric-is-epistemic theorists' habit of equivocating about the meanings of "rhetoric" and "certainty." The result makes it possible to endorse the validity of Scott's essentially ethical conclusions, while dismissing a number of unnecessary complexities in the arguments made by rhetoric-as-epistemic theorists. Finally, a few alternatives that might lead to more robust foundations for the rhetoric-as-epistemic thesis are suggested.In 1978, after reviewing four distinct interpretations of the claim that rhetoric is epistemic, Leff concluded that clarification of what that claim means "deserves more disciplined treatment than it has received in the recent literature" (1978, 77). The same could still be said. After some [End Page 335] thirty years of active research and speculation on the topic, one now sees fewer publications specifically advocating that rhetoric is epistemic. The distinguished rhetorical theorist Barry Brummett (1990) has declared the thesis deceased (69-72).All the same, textbook authors treat the thesis as a given, despite their tendency to interpret it in wildly different ways. Foss, for example, puts forward a view that "in the field of communication, the idea that rhetoric creates reality is known as the notion that rhetoric is epistemic, which simply means that rhetoric creates knowledge; epistemology is the study of the origin and nature of knowledge" (1989, 122; emphasis in the original). This version of the thesis, claiming that rhetoric actually "creates reality," might be more ontological than it is epistemic.1 Herrick takes a dialectical view that "through rhetorical interaction, people come to accept some ideas as true and to reject others as false. Thus, rhetoric's epistemic function in society can be seen in some ways to be a result of its benefit of testing ideas." Herrick continues that "once an idea has been tested thoroughly by a group, community, and society, it becomes part of what these groups take to be knowledge." Herrick contrasts this with the rejected view that "knowledge is all objective in nature and comes to us by way of direct experience or education" (1997, 22). Both Herrick and Foss offer interesting theses, and both attribute their views to Scott, but their views are obviously very different. There can be no surer evidence of the failure to use terms precisely.Brummett (1990) attributes the demise of rhetoric-is-epistemic research to the failure of critics to employ the idea in rhetorical criticism. Brummett might be right to the extent that much of the rhetoric-is-epistemic literature is indeed exceptionally abstract. Specific discussions might clarify some issues. Nonetheless, some notable rhetorical critics have indeed employed a concept that rhetoric is epistemic (e.g., Scott and Klumpp 1984; Sullivan 1992). The issues remain unclear. Furthermore, rhetorical criticism per se cannot clarify the meanings of theoretical terms. More likely, one sees less and less published research about the thesis that rhetoric is epistemic precisely because the thesis has not been laid out clearly... (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:What Do You Mean, Rhetoric Is Epistemic?William D. HarpineIn 1967, Robert L. Scott (1967) advocated that "rhetoric is epistemic." This concept has enriched the work of rhetorical theorists and critics. Scott's essay is founded in a concept of argumentative justification in rhetoric, viewed as an alternative to analytic logic. Other writers, including Brummett (1976), Railsback (1983), and Cherwitz and Hikins (1986), have offered variations on Scott's theme. The thesis (...) that rhetoric is epistemic has been controversial, however, and from the tone of the debate one may draw two conclusions: many rhetorical theorists feel that Scott was on to something important, and the thesis as it has been developed is flawed. Much of the dispute centers on what the thesis means. These discussions have not yet adequately clarified that issue.The philosopher's most fundamental obligation is to define terms with care. It is in precisely this respect that the rhetoric-is-epistemic theorists have fallen short. Some of the key terms in this literature include rhetoric, knowledge, certainty, and truth. In too many cases, the writers on rhetorical epistemology have not defined their key terms at all. In other cases, their definitions are inadequate or inconsistent. This essay undertakes to sort out the most important definitional problems, which center on the rhetoric-is-epistemic theorists' habit of equivocating about the meanings of "rhetoric" and "certainty." The result makes it possible to endorse the validity of Scott's essentially ethical conclusions, while dismissing a number of unnecessary complexities in the arguments made by rhetoric-as-epistemic theorists. Finally, a few alternatives that might lead to more robust foundations for the rhetoric-as-epistemic thesis are suggested.In 1978, after reviewing four distinct interpretations of the claim that rhetoric is epistemic, Leff concluded that clarification of what that claim means "deserves more disciplined treatment than it has received in the recent literature" (1978, 77). The same could still be said. After some [End Page 335] thirty years of active research and speculation on the topic, one now sees fewer publications specifically advocating that rhetoric is epistemic. The distinguished rhetorical theorist Barry Brummett (1990) has declared the thesis deceased (69-72).All the same, textbook authors treat the thesis as a given, despite their tendency to interpret it in wildly different ways. Foss, for example, puts forward a view that "in the field of communication, the idea that rhetoric creates reality is known as the notion that rhetoric is epistemic, which simply means that rhetoric creates knowledge; epistemology is the study of the origin and nature of knowledge" (1989, 122; emphasis in the original). This version of the thesis, claiming that rhetoric actually "creates reality," might be more ontological than it is epistemic.1 Herrick takes a dialectical view that "through rhetorical interaction, people come to accept some ideas as true and to reject others as false. Thus, rhetoric's epistemic function in society can be seen in some ways to be a result of its benefit of testing ideas." Herrick continues that "once an idea has been tested thoroughly by a group, community, and society, it becomes part of what these groups take to be knowledge." Herrick contrasts this with the rejected view that "knowledge is all objective in nature and comes to us by way of direct experience or education" (1997, 22). Both Herrick and Foss offer interesting theses, and both attribute their views to Scott, but their views are obviously very different. There can be no surer evidence of the failure to use terms precisely.Brummett (1990) attributes the demise of rhetoric-is-epistemic research to the failure of critics to employ the idea in rhetorical criticism. Brummett might be right to the extent that much of the rhetoric-is-epistemic literature is indeed exceptionally abstract. Specific discussions might clarify some issues. Nonetheless, some notable rhetorical critics have indeed employed a concept that rhetoric is epistemic (e.g., Scott and Klumpp 1984; Sullivan 1992). The issues remain unclear. Furthermore, rhetorical criticism per se cannot clarify the meanings of theoretical terms. More likely, one sees less and less published research about the thesis that rhetoric is epistemic precisely because the thesis has not been laid out clearly... (shrink)

Kripke [1972] a présenté un argument très influent contre le physicalisme, basé sur l’idée suivante : les énoncés psycho-physiques—ceux qui identifient les phénomènes psychologiques de l’expérience à des phénomènes physiques—sont, s’ils sont vrais, nécessairement vrais. Pourtant, ils semblent être contingents. Par la suite, Levine [1983] a prétendu que l’apparence de contingence était due à un «fossé explicatif » qui se trouve dans ces énoncés : les phénomènes physiques ne semblent pas rendre compte de l’existence et des caractéristiques des phénomènes psychologiques. (...) Je suspecte que l’apparition du fossé explicatif résulte, du moins en partie, du fait que l’on prend la subjectivité de l’expérience comme une condition ontologique alors qu’elle serait épistémologique. Dans ce papier je présente et développe cette idée. (shrink)

Le Foss ou logiciel libre, est un mouvement de fond qui valorise le partage de l'effort collectif dans la production logicielle et lutte ainsi contre l'appropriation intellectuelle de toute création humaine que les grandes industries de l'information cherchent à imposer. Le gouvernement brésilien a choisit de favoriser le Foss dans toute la société brésilienne.The Foss , or free software, is a fundamental movement that promotes the sharing of effort in software production and fight against and intellectual ownership of any human (...) creation that major information industries seek to impose. The Brazilian government has chosen to promote the Foss throughout Brazilian society. (shrink)

Le dégagement de cinq fosses dépotoirs au comblement homogène sur le site de l’Archipiskopi à Nicosie fouillé par F. Hadjichristofi (Département des Antiquités de Chypre) de 2009 à 2011 a livré un bel échantillonnage de productions chypriotes déjà connues et d’importations byzantines et proche-orientales. Cependant, l’intérêt majeur de ces assemblages réside dans la mise en évidence d’une production locale de poterie à pâte calcaire, glaçurée ou non. Cette activité potière à Nicosie a débuté à la fin du xiie‑xiiie siècle et (...) s’est poursuivie presque inchangée au xive siècle. Les productions de la capitale des Lusignan sont diversifiées et, pour une partie d’entre elles, témoignent d’apports proche-orientaux – émail, bases à disque, cruche à filtre. L’artisanat de la terre dans l’île ainsi que les liens entretenus avec les territoires croisé et musulman du Proche‑Orient sont donc réexaminés au regard de ces nouvelles données. (shrink)

L’obiettivo del testo è di indagare se sia possibile attribuire a Platone una concezione dualista della natura umana, quindi se il filosofo possa essere inscritto nella linea dei pensatori che si sono posti il cosiddetto “Mind-Body Problem”. In molteplici passi dei dialoghi platonici si rinviene l’affermazione che il corpo e l’anima costituiscono due nature differenti e, in certa misura, incompatibili. D’altro canto, la relazione fra corpo e anima è costitutiva dell’uomo e si rende manifesta nell’atto della percezione. La presente riflessione (...) si svilupperà in tre momenti. Dapprima esporremo le ragioni per cui è giustificato affermare che esiste in Platone una differenza fra anima e corpo; quindi analizzeremo l’unione di anima e corpo come attributo essenziale della natura umana; termineremo l’indagine attraverso la ricerca della “ghiandola pineale platonica”, ossia l’elemento che permette di parlare di anima e corpo come di una relazione duale che si costituisce non come una unità indifferenziata, né come una giustapposizione di fattori estranei l’uno all’altro. La nostra proposta consiste nel mostrare che lo scambio di informazioni fra anima e corpo avviene attraverso una modifica nelle proporzioni matematico armoniche che articolano entrambe le potenze. (shrink)

Les céramiques présentées ici proviennent de quatre dépôts scellés sous une maison de Nicosie et vidés en 1948. Ces fosses, au remplissage homogène, contenaient des cruches, des marmites, des poêlons et de la vaisselle de service produits à Chypre, de rares importations anatoliennes ou balkaniques et une belle collection de vaisselle de table de Ligurie, de Toscane, de Vénétie et d’Émilie-Romagne. Cette dernière, bien datée, permet d’attribuer le contenu des dépotoirs au dernier quart du xvie‑première moitié du xviie s. Une (...) ébauche de chronotypologie peut donc être établie pour les céramiques des ateliers de Lapithos, de Nicosie et du Troodos, très mal connues pour cette période. La confrontation des sources écrites, faisant état de la prise de la ville par les Ottomans en 1570 et des années qui suivirent, avec cette exceptionnelle source archéologique montre que la vie quotidienne avait sans doute repris un cours normal dès le début du xviie s. (shrink)

L’argument principal de cet article est qu’il n’y a pas d’incompatibilité entre les explications physicalistes et l’idée de conscience phénoménale. Ayant comme référence une analyse de certaines propriétés sui generis de la conscience phénoménale, nous avons l’intention de souligner que l’apparente incompatibilité entre le mental et le physique peut être éliminée. De façon plus précise, nous soutenons la thèse selon laquelle les propriétés sui generis des événements mentaux, connues comme qualia, sont des propriétés physiques. Ces propriétés constitueraient, comme l’affirme Tye, (...) les contenus représentationnels nonconceptuels de nos expériences. En outre, ces propriétés sont des inputs des processus physiques dont les outputs seraient des états intentionnels avec des contenus propositionnels.The main argument of this paper is that there is no gap between physicalist explanations and phenomenal consciousness, as a matter of principle. Based on an analysis of certain sui generis properties of phenomenal consciousness, I aim to demonstrate that the apparent explanatory gap between the mental and the physical can be eliminated. More specifically, I want to defend the claim that the so-called sui generis qualities of mental events, referred to as qualia, are physical properties. These properties would constitute, as Tye puts it, the nonconceptual representational content of our conscious experiences. Moreover, they are the input of physical processes whose output would be intentional states with propositional content. (shrink)

Les fouilles conduites en 2013 à Dikili Tash dans le secteur 6 ont mis en évidence une nouvelle phase d’occupation. Deux fosses et leur sol environnant se trouvent dans une position stratigraphique intermédiaire entre la couche de destruction de la fin du Néolithique Récent et les premières structures du Bronze Ancien. Parmi les quelque 80 vases ou fragments collectés dans le remblai, plusieurs ont des parallèles sur des sites de Thasos et des Rhodopes dans des niveaux du Néolithique/Chalcolithique Final. Les (...) datations absolues placent ce mobilier vers 4000 av. J.‑C. C’est la première fois que cette phase est attestée sur un tell de la région ; le scénario d’un abandon des habitats des plaines vers 4200 av. J.‑C. doit donc être révisé. De plus, l’apparition de certains traits typiques des productions céramiques du Bronze Ancien invite à reconsidérer l’émergence de ce faciès. (shrink)

En localisant les xoana d'Hermès et d'Aphrodite, mentionnés par Pausanias (II 19, 6), au-dessus de la fosse où P. Courbin avait découvert deux carapaces de tortue, c'est tout un ensemble d'édifices ou d'offrandes décrits par le Périégéte qui trouvent place au Nord et à l'Est des Thermes romains. On est aussi amené à préciser la localisation du kritérion/dikastérion et à confirmer l'identification du premier état des Thermes avec l'Asclépieion mentionné par Pausanias, comme le propose P. Aupert. D'autre part, il s'avère (...) particulièrement utile pour comprendre la topographie argienne de replacer le complexe d'offrandes liées aux Danaïdes dans le cadre des restaurations augustéennes, comme y invitent aussi l'existence d'une place Delta autant que la présence d'une statue d'Énée dans le voisinage des consécrations à Aphrodite, Artémis et Athéna. (shrink)

Chaque nouvelle technologie suscite des illusions sur les nouvelles possibilités d'accès aux connaissances qu'elle ouvre à tous. Cet article s'intéresse aux différents types d'offres éducatives accessibles sur Internet, de la moins structurée à la plus organisée, et s'appuie sur des travaux de recherche pour mettre en évidence le fait qu'il existe un fossé entre la liberté potentielle d'accès aux savoirs et son accès effectif. Il souligne les diverses difficultés rencontrées par les apprenants et rarement prises en compte par l'institution éducative, (...) et il insiste sur l'importance de la fonction tutorale pour aider les moins armés, qui sont aussi les plus nombreux, à acquérir l'autonomie nécessaire à ce mode d'apprentissage. Il conclut que, faute d'un investissement important dans ce domaine, l'égalité des chances et la «liberté d'apprendre» pour tous, dont les formations en ligne se prétendent ou se voudraient porteuses, ne peuvent que demeurer des mythes.Every new technology creates illusions about the new possibilities it opens up access to knowledge for all. This article looks at different types of educational opportunities available on the Internet, the less structured to more organized and is based on research to highlight the fact that there is a gap between the potential freedom access to knowledge and effective access. It highlights the various problems encountered by learners and rarely taken into account by the educational institution, and emphasizes the importance of the role of tutor to help those less armed, who are also the most likely to acquire the necessary autonomy this mode of learning. He concludes that without a significant investment in this area, equal opportunities and the "freedom to learn" for all, including online training would pretend or carriers, can only remain myths. (shrink)

Claude Lévi-Strauss et Theodor W. Adorno ont formulé des diagnostics semblables concernant notamment les maux qui frappent les sociétés modernes mais également le rôle crucial que la question artistique peut jouer dans l’élaboration d’une sortie de crise. En raison de méthodologies et de cheminements de pensée parfaitement autonomes de chaque côté du Rhin, ce rapprochement est souvent passé inaperçu. Dans le champ précisément de l’esthétique, l’écart entre les formes artistiques défendues par chacun d’eux a même eu tendance à entériner le (...) sentiment d’une insurmontable divergence. Pourtant, en réinscrivant leur esthétique respective au sein de leur aspiration commune, cet article se propose de dépasser cet apparent fossé. (shrink)

Du fait de la mondialisation, notre histoire présente est pleine de nouveaux enjeux culturels, éducatifs, économiques, et technologiques, qu'accompagnent un cortège de problèmes. Les différentes aires culturelles et linguistiques produisent de plus en plus de savoirs en ligne sur toute une variété de supports. Il semble que la normalisation des accès à ces savoirs soit une condition essentielle et incontournable pour, à la fois, faciliter la circulation de ces données et respecter la diversité de leurs sources. Cette normalisation devrait contribuer (...) non seulement à combler le fossé séparant les pays du Nord et du Sud, mais aussi à préserver le pluralisme culturel de l'humanité.Due to globalization, our present history is full of new challenges cultural, educational, economic, and technological, accompanied a procession of problems. Different cultural and linguistic areas produce more online knowledge on a variety of substrates. It seems that the standardization of access to knowledge is an essential and indispensable to both facilitate the movement of such data and respect the diversity of their sources. This standardization should contribute not only to bridge the gap between the North and South, but also to preserve the cultural pluralism of humanity. (shrink)

Description du puits monumental de la place au NE du Passage des Théores et de la stratigraphie du comblement de la fosse. Publication du mobilier : 1 — Les monnaies (O. Picard). 2 — Les timbres céramiques (Y. Garlan). 3 — La céramique, catalogue raisonné (Fr. Blonde). 4 — Notes sur les analyses de céramiques (M. Picon). Ces catégories de matériel permettent d'avancer la date de ca 330 av. n.è. comme terminus posl quem du comblement et de la destruction de (...) ce puits. (shrink)

Existe-t-il une tension entre la Loi de continuité (LC) d’Émilie du Châtelet et sa conviction qu’il existe une différence de nature entre les propositions absolument certaines et les propositions moralement certaines? Dans cet article, je soutiens qu’il n’y a pas de tension, car les commentateurs peuvent faire au moins deux choix d’interprétation. Tout d’abord, ils pourraient affirmer que pour du Châtelet, la LC ne devrait s’appliquer qu’au domaine empirique : il existe un fossé épistémique entre le monde naturel et empirique (...) à partir duquel nous obtenons des vérités moralement certaines, et le monde abstrait et métaphysique à partir duquel nous obtenons des vérités absolument certaines. L’autre alternative, que je défends ici, est la suivante : interpréter du Châtelet comme croyant en une formulation épistémologique de la LC, auquel cas (i) il n’y a pas de différence de nature entre les propositions absolument certaines et moralement certaines, et (ii) le domaine de toutes les vérités est constitué de toutes les vérités, même les vérités absolument certaines (contrairement aux positions de Brading en 2019, Detlefsen en 2014, et de Wells à venir). Cette interprétation résout la tension car elle signifie que du Châtelet n’est pas engagée – à proprement parler – dans une différence de nature entre les vérités absolument et moralement certaines, ce qui est donc cohérent avec une formulation épistémologique de la LC (puisqu’il n’y aurait pas de sauts ou de lacunes entre l’une et l’autre). Selon cette interprétation, il est en principe possible que des vérités moralement certaines deviennent des vérités absolument certaines, une fois que le Principe de contradiction (PC) ou Dieu est la raison suffisante pour laquelle les premières sont en fait absolument certaines. (shrink)

Lors de sondages dans les environs de la parodos Nord du théâtre d'Argos en 1981 et 1982, fut découverte une fosse d'environ 3,70 m de longueur contenant plus de mille fragments de figurines en terre cuite ainsi que 63 fragments de moules. Les figurines, dont une partie est modelée à la main, s'échelonnent du vie au début du me siècle av. J.-C. avec un point fort au ve siècle. La richesse typologique du matériel nous donne une vue d'ensemble du développement (...) de la coroplathie argienne durant plus de deux siècles. La présence des moules permet de voir dans le matériel le dépotoir d'un atelier de coroplathes, quoiqu'une partie des figurines ait pu avoir un caractère votif. En l'absence de stratigraphie il faut supposer que la fosse a été remblayée en une seule fois, peut-être lors de la préparation du terrain pour la construction du théâtre au début de l'époque hellénistique. (shrink)

Amor Masovic, responsable de la commission de recherche des disparus en Bosnie-Herzégovine et ancien responsable de la commission pour l’échange des prisonniers pendant la guerre de 1992-1995, nous présente ensuite un tableau accablant des disparitions dans les guerres récentes en ex-Yougoslavie, et des pratiques pour faire en sorte que ceux-ci ne soient ni retrouvés ni, encore moins, identifiés (d’où des fosses communes de deux types : « primaires » – où les corps furent enterrés initialement – et « secondaires » (...) – où ces mêmes corps furent ré-enterrés, souvent démembrés, après avoir été déterrés pour être dispersés et moins aisés à repérer). 28 000 des 40 000 disparus ex-Yougoslaves relèvent du conflit en Bosnie et sont à 95 % des civils protégés par les conventions de Genève. Sur les 280 charniers identifiés la plupart se trouvaient à l’arrière et non sur le front et les disparitions sont datables à des périodes de non-combat. Le but de la commission est donc d’abord de retrouver et identifier les morts pour « faire savoir » et permettre le deuil (puisque la barbarisation qui a été exercée est double : contre les victimes et contre leurs familles qui ne peuvent « vivre » tant qu’elles n’ont pas de certitude). En outre, faute de disposition légale et d’une absence de droit spécifique des disparus personne ne peut être incriminé pour une disparition devant le TPIY où les « disparus » ne sont donc pas représentés. Amor Masovic tire quatre conclusions de son exposé : 1) la barbarie exprimée aujourd’hui est pour partie un résultat des manques de la justice à l’égard des crimes de guerre de la seconde guerre mondiale ; 2) la guerre contre les civils augmente en même temps qu’augmentent les dispositions internationales contre ces exactions qui restent donc purement formelles ; 3) en Bosnie, la barbarisation s’est exercée sur les corps des victimes de façon redoublée puisque l’anéantissement des preuves du crime fait que la mort n’est pas une vraie fin. D’où une forme particulière de barbarisation d’après-guerre ; 4) seul élément plus « positif » : en Bosnie des échanges de prisonniers eurent lieu pendant la guerre sans attendre la fin du conflit ce qui est rarissime et va au-delà des exigences posées par les conventions de Genève en matière de libération des prisonniers. (shrink)

Le site d'éditeur indique : "Se il reale fosse semplice, non avremmo molto da pensare, saremmo di fronte alle parti ultime, agli elementi fondanti dell'essere; la complessità è dunque la vera causa, e il vero oggetto, del pensiero umano, sfida indefinitamente aperta per ricondurre il caos amorfo ad una máthesis universale. Non si può dunque fare la storia della complessità, si dovrebbe ripensare tutto il pensiero. Il non potere dire tutto non ci esime, tuttavia, dal dire qualcosa. Il tema della (...) complessità è attualmente oggetto di molte riflessioni da parte di studiosi di discipline tanto scientifiche quanto umanistiche. Il termine è utilizzato con sempre maggiore frequenza e di-mestichezza in diversi contesti di discussione e in numerose pubblicazioni, scientifiche e non, che negli ultimi decenni hanno trattato il tema, rischiando anche, talvolta, di contribuire a generare incertezza sulla corretta accezione. Sebbene l'uso 'popolare' del termine, riferito a situazioni di vita quotidiana, sia normalmente associato a problematiche di difficile se non di impossibile soluzione, l'accezione tecnica, propria degli studiosi di questa o quella disciplina, realizza invece un gradiente ampio di significati, non sempre sovrapponibili, e difficilmente riconducibili ad un comune denominatore. L'opera, nell'auspicio di offrire uno stimolo al lettore, sollecitandolo soprattutto a lasciarsi coinvolgere nell'appassionante dibattito che mette a confronto matrici culturali diverse, intende, innanzitutto, riconoscere la rilevanza del contributo di ogni singola prospettiva disciplinare, la cui capacità di andare in profondità e di cogliere aspetti particolari rimane insostituibile; d'altra parte, intende intercettare elementi di comunanza e di convergenza che consentono il recupero di una unitarietà dei fenomeni che sempre più spesso si vede frammentata nella separazione disciplinare, ma che rimane una realtà e forse soprattutto un valore.". (shrink)

RésuméCet article part d'une lecture inhabituelle, inégalitaire, du terme fiṭra dans le Ḥayy ibn Yaqẓān d'Ibn Ṭufayl ; cette lecture modifie de façon conséquente notre compréhension de l'ensemble de l’œuvre. Nous verrons qu’à des moments cruciaux de la démonstration, il n'utilise le terme fiṭra que pour décrire la capacité des êtres à raisonner, ce qui implique qu'un fossé divise l'humanité et défie les acceptions ordinairement égalitaires de la fiṭra. Ce fossé éclaire, selon moi, les implications politiques du conte. Alors qu'Ibn (...) Ṭufayl insiste sur la compatibilité entre la philosophie récemment parvenue en Andalousie et celle, plus établie, de la religion révélée, il montre, à l'aide de la fiṭra, que la vie philosophique n'est destinée qu’à un petit nombre. Prêter attention à l'usage qu'Ibn Ṭufayl fait de la fiṭra peut aider à expliquer l'une des raisons pour lesquelles il écrivit ce conte pour la cour. Son message global accentue le rôle de la religion et tempère l'importance politique de la philosophie de deux façons : d'une part, en avançant que seuls quelques individus choisis sont capables d'accéder à la vérité indépendamment de la révélation ; d'autre part, en refusant à ces êtres exceptionnellement doués la capacité de communiquer leurs découvertes aux masses. (shrink)

L’interprétation d’un acte de violence de masse est toujours délicate puisqu’elle confère un certain statut au groupe visé. Ce statut peut devenir un facteur important dans la décision de la communauté internationale de reconnaître ou non l’indépendance d’un groupe et de son territoire. Cet article examine le cas de la reconnaissance du Kosovo par la communauté internationale, en février 2008, et soutient que cette reconnaissance a été rendue possible par l’utilisation d’arguments basés sur le statut collectif de victime de nettoyage (...) ethnique détenu par la population albanaise du Kosovo. L’article comble le fossé entre, d’un côté, la théorie de la sécession comme réparation, et de l’autre, les travaux sur la violence de masse contre les groupes ethnonationaux. L’analyse montre que la pratique de la reconnaissance étatique a été réorientée vers un critère restrictif lié au type de violence subie par le groupe réclamant l’indépendance. Dans cette optique, le territoire devient une forme tangible de compensation pour les injustices subies, ce qui tranche par rapport à la pratique antérieure de la reconnaissance étatique dans l’ex-Yougoslavie et ailleurs.The interpretation of an act of mass violence is always a contentious issue since it confers a certain status to the targeted group. This status may become an important factor in the international community’s decision to recognize or not the independence of a group and its territory. This article examines the case of Kosovo’s February 2008 recognition by the international community and argues that this recognition was made possible by the summoning of arguments based on Kosovo Albanians’ collective status as victims of ethnic cleansing. The article bridges the gap between on the one hand the Remedial Right theory of secession, and on the other hand, works on mass violence against ethnonational groups. The article shows that the practice of state recognition was reoriented towards a restrictive criterion linked to the type of violence sustained by the group claiming independence. Under this interpretation, territory becomes a tangible form of compensation for suffered injustices, which contrasts with earlier practice of state recognition in the former Yugoslavia and elsewhere. (shrink)

L’article montre d’abord jusqu’où convergent la dialectique hégélienne de l’Idée et la dialectique lautmanienne des Idées, et ce sur quoi elles se séparent en profondeur : sur la négativité et le statut de la contradiction. Il s’intéresse ensuite à certaines formalisations qui ont été proposées de ces deux dialectiques : celle de Doz et Dubarle pour Hegel dans une extension de la logique booléenne, et celle, récemment esquissée par F. Zalamea en théorie des catégories, pour Lautman. Est montré dans ses (...) grandes lignes comment la traductibilité mutuelle, au niveau technique, peut être établie entre les deux entreprises, la conséquence étant que la divergence spéculative semble rétroactivement gommée, que le négatif semble avoir disparu. À partir de ce paradoxe sont présentées quelques pistes de réflexion sur les enjeux de la démarche de formalisation, entendue comme entreprise de réduction du fossé existant entre le conceptuel et le formel, et de ce qu’elle révèle des rapports entre mathématiques et philosophie.The paper begins by showing what is common to Hegel’s dialectic of the Idea and Lautman’s dialectic of Ideas, and where they diverge deeply : on negativity and the status of contradiction. It then focuses on two different attempts to formalize these dialectics : Doz and Dubarle’s attempt to formalize the Hegelian one in an extension of Boolean logic ; and, more recently, Zalamea’s formalization of the Lautmanian one through category theory. The paper then sketches how, at a technical level, these two attempts can be translated one into the other — which indicates, in turn, that the speculative divergence seems to have disappeared, that the negative has been erased. With reference to this paradox the paper provides the reader with some reflections dealing with the stakes of the formalizing process, seen as way of reducing the gap existing between the conceptual and the definite, and of what it reveals of the relations between mathematics and philosophy. (shrink)

On admet en général qu’il y a deux sortes de concepts normatifs : les concepts évaluatifs, comme bon, et les concepts déontiques, comme devoir. La question que soulève cette distinction est celle de savoir comment il est possible d’affirmer que les concepts évaluatifs sont normatifs. En effet, comme les concepts déontiques semblent constituer le coeur du domaine normatif, plus le fossé entre les deux sortes de concepts est grand, moins il paraîtra plausible d’affirmer que les concepts évaluatifs sont normatifs. Après (...) avoir présenté les différences principales entre les concepts évaluatifs et les concepts déontiques, et montré qu’il y a plus qu’une différence superficielle entre les deux sortes de concepts, j’examinerai la question de la normativité des concepts évaluatifs. Il deviendra apparent que même s’il s’agit de concepts ayant des fonctions différentes, il existe un grand nombre de relations entre les concepts évaluatifs, d’une part, et les concepts de devoir et de raison, d’autre part.It is generally accepted that there are two sorts of normative concepts : evaluative concepts, such as good, and deontic concepts, such as ought. The question that is raised by this distinction is how it is possible to claim that evaluative concepts are normative. As deontic concepts appear to be at the heart of normativity, the more there is a gap between evaluative and deontic concepts, the less it appears plausible to say that evaluative concepts are normative. After having presented the main differences between evaluative and deontic concepts, and shown that there is more than a superficial difference between the two sorts of concepts, the paper turns to the question of the normativitity of evaluative concepts. It will become clear that even if these concepts have different functions, there are a great many ties between evaluative concepts, on the one hand, and the concepts of ought and of reason, on the other hand. (shrink)

INTRODUCTION BY NANCY FUMERO What is a translation that stalls comprehension? That, when read, parsed, obfuscates comprehension through any language – English, Portuguese. It is inevitable that readers expect fidelity from translations. That language mirror with a sort of precision that enables the reader to become of another location, condition, to grasp in English in a similar vein as readers of Portuguese might from João Guimarães Rosa’s GRANDE SERTÃO: VEREDAS. There is the expectation that translations enable mobility. That what was (...) written in one language be accessible in another. And that a translator is to serve as a mediator, acting ultimately in service to ideas within the source text. To disperse them. However, this notion of translation is partly antithetical to the ideas in Rosa’s work. Or, alternately, to convey the despair of terrain slipping beneath one’s feet, and to encounter the heightened suspense of magic, the translation, as part of its strategy, cannot devotedly rely on its original language, not as its source text. The work undertaken by Felipe W.Martinez is a new form of translation that risks everything in order to encounter the same treacherous knowing Rosa had traversed. And it takes its risks by not taking risks: by being, almost word for word, a literal translation. This is an approach that reductively converts, as opposed to translates. The idiomatic differences between English and Portuguese are not accented. The syntax is not finessed. Liberties are not assumed on account of improving readability. What stands, resoundingly amid such absences, is the awakened challenge of reading. The genuine peril of not knowing. That is, this translation, one that purports to know nothing, creates access into the guileful world Rosa had created in Portuguese. But not by translating. If anything, GRANDE SERTÃO: VEREDAS is speaking a cosmic language through a linguistic one. And W.Martinez does us the service of recognizing this, as what configures the shapes of words and sentences is not as simple as neologisms, portmanteaus, and digressions, but as terrifying as the path the fool traverses: all paths. As such, this translation doesn’t speak English, just as the original does not speak Portuguese. It is the assemblage of paradox as a new logic that can be navigated, if only one could suspend the comfort of readability, of expectation. If one could descend a mountain in the pitch dark of night, each step shocking the body, unable to acclimate to the unleveled heights. Without a doubt, the translation is incongruous to the Portuguese. Taking a small excerpt to compare: Eh, well, thereafter, the rest the Sir provide: comes the bread, comes the hand, comes the god, comes the dog. What is striking is the interplay between “god” and “dog”. To most English speakers, this anagram is a familiar one. But in Portuguese the words god (“deus”) and dog (“cão”) are not so closely linked. In fact, there is no direct mention of “deus” in Rosa’s text: Eh, pois, empós, o resto o senhor prove: vem o pão, vem a mão, vem o são, vem o cão. Both are fascinating. In Rosa’s excerpt, the rhythm is unmistakable and precise, despite, of course, the indices of hesitation: the commas, the Eh, the uncomfortable way of searching through prolongation and wait. This is the sort of paradox Rosa can engage within a sentence. W.Martinez’s does this as well, at a scale that reverberates beyond the sentence, and with one noticeable addition: deus. What may appear to be an overstep, to add such a weighted word that draws out wordplay but is, nevertheless, not in the source text, is exemplary of risk. The translation buzzes because of it. This is because throughout the text we encounter dogs frequently, as some primal beast on par with humans. The dog is one that masters and can be mastered. A creature that is at times its face, and at others a mask. It is a powerful presence. For the translator to be attuned to the reverent undercurrent attributed to this animal, and create within the translation such charged play in English from what was only an implication in Portuguese, is in tribute to the grand beauty within dissonance. What aberrant modes of writing and translation can teach us most assuredly, is that things, words, are not in states of rightness or wrongness, but of oscillation. This isn’t so different from what Rosa says himself: The Sir look…see: the most important and beautiful, of the world, is this: that the people are not always same, still were not completed — but that they go always shifting. They tune or detune. We find this so readily in W.Martinez’s translation, this tuning and detuning. Nancy Fumero Los Angeles GRAND SERTÃO: VEREDAS BY JOÃO GUIMARÃES ROSA TRANSLATED FROM THE PORTUGUESE BY FELIPE W.MARTINEZ Nonothing. Shots that the Sir heard were man brawling not, God be. Bleach white sights on the tree in the backyard, down in the river. By my right. I do this every day, I like; from the bad of boyhood. Thereof they came to call on me. Case of a calf: a white calf, errorful, eyes of to not be—saw selves—; and with a mask of a dog! They told me; I didn’t want to catch a sight. Same that, by the defects of birth, upturned lips, looked to be a laughing man. Folkface, dogface: they determined—it was the devil. Bananas. Killed it. Do not know who owned it. They came to borrow my guns. I caved. I’ve no power to impose. Oh, sir, you laugh certain laughs…Look: when it’s a true shot, first the dogs begin to bark, instantly—after, then, you see who’s handed death. Sir, endure, this is the Sertão. Some want that it is not: that situated Sertão is in and out of those general fields, they say, end of the road, highlands, the other Urucuia. Toleima. For those of Cortino and of Curvelo, then, isn’t here said Sertão? Ah! That there’s more! To place the Sertão it’s told: it’s where the pastures lack latches; where one can tear off ten, fifteen leagues without running into a houseinhabitant; where criminalousness lives out its christ jesus. Sifted out from the tightening grip of the law. The Urcuia comes from the western mountains. But today, its banks, give all—farmlands of farms, pastures of meadows of good yield, low tides, cultures that go kill for kill, until these virgins there are. The general fields run round. These general fields are without size. Ultimately, whichever one one approves, the Sir knows: bread or breads, it’s a question of heads…the Sertão is everywhere. Of the devi? No comment. Sir ask the dwellers. Falsely I fear they unspeak that name of his—only say: whatsitcalled. Volt! no… Whosoever over avoids it, lives with it. In the sentence of one Aristides—who exists in the first palm grove on the right hand side, called Vereda-of-Cow-Calm-of-Saint-Rita—everyone believes: he can't pass in three designated places: then can be heard the tiny cry, behind, a little voice warning:— "Here I come! Here I come!... "— that is the Capirote, the whatsitcalled... And one Jise Simplicio—who anyone from here will swear he keeps an imp in house, a little satanite, imprisoned and obliged to help in all greedful deeds; reason that Simplicio emprises en route to complete riches. As such, for this they say too that his beast bristles and refuses, denying his banner, unyielding, when he wishes to mount... Superstition. Jise Simplicio and Aristides, continue getting fatter, thence unheard or heard. Still the Sir study: right now, in these days of time, you have people purporting that the devil proper stopped, mid-passage, in Andrequice. A boy out of there, to whom'd appeared, and there lauded that, to get here—normally, by horse, a day-n-half—he was capable of such with only some twenty minutes enough... by coasting the River of Chico by the headwaters! Or, too, who knows—sans offense—will not have been, for example, even yourself the Sir who announced such, when you passed by there, for fun run funny? Thereof, not my given crime, I know that wasn't. And evil I wanted not. Only that one question, in hours, at times, brightens peaceful reason. But, the Sir understand: if such a boy, there was, he wanted to dupe. Because, hey, that, to cut the river off by the springs, would be the same thing as one redoubling in the internals of this our state of ours, costant of a journey of some three months... Then? Whatsitcalled? Dodo. The fantastication. And, the respect of giving him such these names of delicacy, is what it is for one to want to invoke that he form of form, with his presence! Not that is. I, personally, almost that have lost in him the creed, deserving to Deus; is the that to the Sir I say, to pure-secret. I know that it is well established, that it greases our Saintly-Gospels. On occasion, I conversed with a young seminarian, super suitable, conferring in the book of prayers and coated in vestments, with a stick of black-sage in hand—prosed that he went auxilitator to the father, to extract the Cujo, from the body living of an oldwoman, in Waterfalls-of-Bulls, he went with the vicar of Field-Round... I conceive. The Sir not is as I? I didn't believe a single thing. Compadre mine Quelemem describes that that which reveals effect are the low spirits meager, of third, adoing in the worst darkness and with anxieties of connecting selves with the livers—they give support. Compadre mine Quelemem is who much me consoles—Quelemem of Goias. But he has to live far from here, in Jijuja, Vereda of Buriti Dark... Ahrr, I leave myself there, that in enevildemonment or with support—the Sir too must have had known diverse, men, women. As not yes? For me, umpteen I've seen, that I've learned. Ma-Neigh, Blood-o'Other, or Legion-Lips, or Tear-em-Down, Cold-Cutter, or Sissy-Goat, one Treciziano, or Verdigris... or Hermogenes... o'them, pileload. If I could forget so many names... I'm not a man for calming horses! And, same, whom of yes of to be jagunço self enters, yea is for some competence entrant of demonion. Will it not? Will it? From first, I made and mixed, and to think not I thought. I didn't have the deadlines. I lived pulling difficult from difficult, fish alive on griddle: who lives asp'rously, no fantasies. But, now, fete of fate to me comes, and sans little disquietudes, I'm from creaky net. And myself invented in this like, of to speculate ideas. The devil exists and nonexists? I say the saying. Opennouncement. These melancholies. The Sir sees: exists waterfall; and since? But waterfall is gulch of ground, and water so pouring from it, retumbling; the Sir consume that water, or undo that bankment, remainder waterfall any? To live is negotiation much perilous. I explain to the Sir: the devil vigors inside of human, the wrinkles of human— or is the human ruin, or the human of adversess. I free, per se, citizen, is that not has devil notone. Notone!— is the that I say. The Sir approve? Me declares total, frank— is high merit that me make: and to beg might, increased. This case— by rashtravagance that me they see— is of mine certain importance. God grant not was... But, not say that the Sir, awised and instructed, that agrees in people of them?! Not? You I appreciate! Your high opinion composes my value. Yea I knew, waited for it— yea the field! Ah, a we, in oldness, we lack of to have plowing of rest. You I appreciate. Is devil notone. Nor esprit. Never I've seen. Someone ought to see, then was I myself, this your servant. Was I you to tell... Well, the devil regulate his state black, ins creatures, ins womens, ins humans. E'en: ins childrens— I declaim. Since not is said: "boy—trainee of the devil"? And ins thes uses, ins plants, ins waters, in terra, in wind... Manures. …The devil in the street, in the middle of the vortex... Hey? Hey? Ah. Figuration mine, of worse by back, the certain memories. Mal-make me! I suffer pain of to tell not…Meliorate, if chillingly: well, in a ground and with equal format of branches and leaves, not give to cassava-calm, that is eaten common, and the cassava-mad that kills? Now, the Sir yea saw a strangeness? A cassava-sweet can rapidly to turn agonizing— motives not I know, at times is said that is for replanted in the terrain always, with mutations then, of caules—go embittering, of s’much in s’much, of its self takes poisons. And, well look: the other, the cassava-mad, too is that at times can fix calm, the estimate, of is to eat sans notone mal. And what this is? Eh, the Sir yea saw, for to see, the ugliness of hate pleated, facetorqued, on the faces of one cobrarattlesnake? Observed the porker fat, capita day more felicity brute, capable of, could, snort and engulf for its own dirty coziness the world total? And sparrowhawk, blackbird, some, the features of they yea represent the need of cleave for before, rend and shred by beak, appears a knife much fine for ruin I desire. Total. Has even twisted races of stone, horrorous, venomous— that spoil mortal the aquas, if they are buried beneath of well; the devil inside of them sleeps: they are the devil. Is known? And the demon— that is only thus the significance of one mercury malign— have order of to follow the path of him, have license to brag?! Arr, he is variegated in all! What the what wastes, goes spending the devil of inside of the people, by itttybits, is the reasonable to suffer. And the delight of love—compadre mine Quelemem says. Family. Really? Is, and not is. The Sir think and not think. Total is and not is… Almost all more grave criminous ferocity, always is much good husband, good son, good father, and is good-friend-of-your-friends! I know of those. Solo that have the afters— and Deus, joined. I spy many nimbi. But, in veracity, son, too, softens. Look: one called Aleixo, resident a league from Step-of-Sour, in Of-Sand, was the man of major badness calm that yea you saw. Me agreed that near the house of his had a weir, amidst the palms, with traíras, for souls of enormous, desenormous, to the real, that received fame; the Aleixo gave of to eat to them, in hours just, they self accustomed to if assuch of lunacies, in order to gobble, seemed to be fishes instructed. One day, solo for grace rustic, he killed an oldman who by there passed, destitute begging alms. The Sir not doubt—have people, in this bored world, that kill solo in order to see someone make grimace… Eh, well, thereafter, the rest the Sir provide: comes the bread, comes the hand, comes the god, comes the dog. This Aleixo was man afamilied, had children small; they were the love of his, total, absurdity. Gave good, that not even a year there passed, of to killed the oldman poor, and the children of Aleixo there they asickened. Smallepidemic of measles, they said, but complex; they never heal. When, then, they healed. But the eyes of theirs vermillionized high in an inflame of spraining to rebellion; and nexthing— the that not I know is if they went of at once, or one later and later other and other— they remained blind. Blind, sans remission of one sweet of light of this Ours! The Sir imagine: stairset— three boys and one girl— all blind. Sans remediable. The Aleixo not lost the judgment, but he changed; ah, mutated complete— now lives of band of Deus, sweating to be good and charitous in all his hours of night and of day. Appears even that he fixed the felicity, that before not was. He himself says he was a man of luck, because Deus wanted to have pity of him, to transform for there the route of his soul. That I heard, and me it gave rage. Reason of the children. If being castigated, what culpa of the let-there-bes of Aleixo those little children had?! Compadre mine Quelemem reproved my uncertainties. That, for certain, inother life returnaound, the children too had been the most wicked, of the mass and part of the father, demons of the same kettle of place. Sir the what thinks? And the oldman, assassinated? — I know the Sir goes to discuss. Well, too. In order that he had a sin of crime, in the body, by to pay. If the people— conforming compadre mine Quelemem is who says— if the people turn to to incarnate renovated, I contemplate even that enemy of death can come as son of the enemy. Look see: if to myself I say, has a subject Pedro Pindo, neighbor of here more six leagues, man of good for all in all, he and the woman of his, always been good, of goodness. They have a son of some ten years called Valtei—name modern, is the that the population of here now appreciates, the Sir knows. Well this-little-thing, thislet, since that some understanding illuminated in him, deed demonstrated the that is: petition stepfather, acid burner, likeful of ruin of inside of the profundity of the species of its nature. In which that torments, to the slowly, of all beasts or raisinglings little that quarrel; one time he found a creole woman hooched foolish sleeping, he arranged a shard of bottle, lashed at three points on the stern of the legs of hers. The what this boy drooled seeing, is bleeding hen or to knife pig.— “I enjoy of to kill…”— one occasion he teeny me told. He opened in me a fright; because: birdy that self leans over— the flight yea is ready! Well the Sir oversee: the pa, Pedro Pindo, mode of to correct this, and the ma, they give in him, misery and mast—they cast the boy sans to eat, they tied to trees in the yard, he nude, unplumed, even in June cold, they tilled the bittybody of his with the trammel and with the goblet, after they cleansed the skin of the sanguine, with bottle gourd brine. The people know, spy, fix wasted. The boy yea relowered of thinness, the eyes entering, caress of bones, enskulled, and tuberculated, the time total hacking, coughness of the that draw parched pectorals. Arr, that now, visible, the Pindo and the woman self habituated of on him hit, of little bit in little they were creating in this a pleasure ugly of diversion— as they regulate the canings in hours certain comfortable, until they call people to see the example good. I think that boy not endure, yea there is in the ta-da, not arrive for the lent to come… Ooee-ooee, then?! Not being as compadre mine Quelemem to want, that explication is that the Sir bestowed? That boy had to be a man. He should, in swing, terrible perversities. Soul of his was in the pitch. Demonstrated. And, now, paid. Ah, but, happens, when he’s crying and paining, he suffers equal that as was as a boy good… Bird, I saw all, in this world! Yea I saw even horse with hiccups… —the that the thing most costous that is. Good, but the Sir may say, should of: and in the start— for offenses and arts, the people— as for that was that s’much amended was started? Ey, ey, ey all collided. Compadre mine Quelemem, too. Am solo a sertanite, in these high ideas I navigate mal. Am much poor poor-thing. Envy my pedigree and of ones conform the Sir, with total reading and doctoration. Not is that I be illiterate. I spelt, years and middle, midly speller, memory and palmer. I had master, Master Lucas, in the Curralinho, he memorized grammar, the operations, rule-of-three, even geography and study patria. On leaves great of paper, with caprice I traced handsome maps. Ah, not is for to speak: but, since of the start, me they thought sophisticated of side. And that I merited of to go to course latin, in Lesson Waterlily—that too they said. Time nostalgic! Going today, I appreciate a good book, despaced. On the farm The Lilittlelemon, of one mine friend Vito Soziano, so sign of this almanac thick, of logoglyphs and conundrums and other divided matters, all year come. In s’much, I place primacy is in the reading advantageous, life of saints, virtues and examples— missionary astute engambling the Indians, or Saint Francis of Assis, Saint Anthony, Saint Gerald… I like much of moral. To ratiocinate, exhort the others for the good way, to acounsel to just. Mine woman, that the Sir knows, vigils for me: much prayer. She is a blessable. Compadre mine Quelemem always says that I may to aquiet my fears on conscience, that being well-attended, terrible good-esprits me protect. Eep! With like… As is of saint effect, I help with mine to want to accredit. But not even always can I. The Sir knew: I total the mine life I thought for me, lining, I am born different. I am and I same. I divert of total the world… I almost that nothing not I know. But I disconfide of many things. The Sir, conceding, I say: in order to think long, I am dog master— the Sir loose in mine front an idea ease and I research that by profundity of total the backwoods, amen! Look: the should of to have, was of so reunited-selves the wise, politicos, constitutions graded, closed the definitive the notion— to proclaim for one time, art assemblies, that not have devil notone, not exists, not possible. Valor of law! Solo assuch, they gave tranquility good to the people. Because the government not cares?! Ah, I know that not is possible. Not me settled the Sir for philistine. One this is to place ideas arranged, other is to deal with country of people, of flesh and sanguine, of thousand-and-many miseries… S’many people—gives scare of to know—and notone so calms: All nascenting, crescendoing, so wedding, wanting collocation of employment, consumables, health, abundance, to be important, wanting rain and affairs good… Of luck that lacks of so to choose: or we t’weave of to live in the salacious common, or care solo of religion solo. I could to be: father clergyman, if not chief of jagunços; for other things not was I birthed. But mine oldness yea principaled I erred of total account. And the rheumatism… There as whom says: in the primers. Ahem. Hey? Hey? The that more I think, I testify and explain: all-the-world is mad. The Sir, I, we, the people all. For this is that so lacks principally of religion: in order to desendodorize, to disdodoate. Pray is that heals of lunacy. In the general. This is that is the salvation-of-the-soul…Much religion your servant! I here, not I lose occasion of religion. I profit of all. I drink water of all rivers… One solo, for me is little, maybe not me arrives. I pray christian, catholic, I burrow the certain; and I accept the prayers of compadre mine Quelemem, doctrine of he, of Kardec. But, when I can, I go in the Mindubim, where one Matias is believer, methodist: the people so accuse of sinner, reads high the bible, and why, singing hymns beautiful of his. Total me quiets, me suspends. Whatever small shade me refreshes. But is solo much provisory. I wanted to pray— the time total. Many people not me approve, they think that law of Deus is privileges, invariable. And I! Doof! I Detest! The what I am? — the what I do, that want, much curia. And in face of total I face, executed. I? —not I trammel. Look: I have a black girl, Maria Leoncia, long from here not she lives, the prayers of her afame much virtue of power. Well to her I pay, every month— ordering of to pray for me one third, every saint day, and, on the Sundays, a rosary. Value, so values. Mine woman not sees mal in this. And I am, yea mandated word for an other, of the voyage-voyage, a Izina Calanga, in order to come here, I heard of that prayer too with grand mermermerits, I go to effect with she treatment equal. I want handful of those, me defending in Deus, reunited of me in volta… Cuts of Christ! To live is much perilous… To want the good with too much force, of incertain way, can yea to be being so wanting the mal, per to initiate. These humans! All they pull the world for itself, for the to concert amended. But capita one solo sees and understands the things of one his world. Amountain, the most supro, most serious was Mediero Vaz. That one man ancient… his Joaozy Ben-Ben, the most brave of all, no-one never can decipher how he by inside consisted. Joca Ramiro— grand man prince!— was politico. Zé Bebelo wanted to be politico, but had and not had luck: fox that lingered. So Candelario so demonized, by to think that was with illness mal. Titao Passos was the by the appreciation of friends: solo per via of them, of his same amities, were that such high so ajagunçoed. Antonio Do— severe bandit. But by half, grand majority half that be. Andalecio, in the profound, a good man-of-good, being raving in his total justice. Ricardao, same, wanted was to be rich in peace: for this he warred. Solo the Hermogenes was that born formed tiger, and assassinite. And the “Ofidios White”? Ah, not me speak. Ah this… joyless mischeivious, that was— that was a poor boy of the destiny… So good, congruous. The Sir heard, I you told: the ruin with the ruin, they terminate by the spine-bushes so to crack— Deus awaits that spendance. Boy!: Deus is patience. The contrary, is the devil. So consumes. The Sir file knife on knife— and file— that so they scrape. Even the rocks of the profound, one of in the other, they go-so aroundabounding even, that the rivulet rolls. Per enquantity, that I think, total as hath, in this world, is because so merits and lacks. Afterly precise. Deus not so reports with rifle, not garrotes the regulation. For what? Quit: goof with goof—one day, some illumination and learn: smart. Solo that, at times, for most auxiliar, Deus begets, in the middle, a pinch of pepper… Therebe? Well, for example: some time, I went of train, there in Seven-Lagoons, for parts of to consult a medical, of name me indicated. He went vested well, and in car of first, by via of the doubts, not me they shadowed for jagunço ancient. It goes and happens, that, close same of me, enfront, he took aseat, returning from the wild North, a mac Jazevedao, delegate professionale. Came with a capanga of his, an undercover, and I well knew the two, of that s’much a was ruin, as the other ruin was. The veracity to say, first I had the strict of me to surpasss for one lonng, to mutate of my place. Judgement me told, meliorate stay. Well, looking, I looked. And— you I tell: never I saw face of man furnished of brutez or malady more, of the them in that. As that was ogre, trussed of thickset, relustered of crude in the eyes small, and armed a chin of stone, toweringbrow; not of mid nor forehead. Not laughed, not so laughed not even one time; but, speaking or silent, the people appeared always to him some teeth, prey pointed of canids. Arr, and blustered, an ittybit. Solo growled curt, low, the mid-words grizzled. He came relooking, historicizing the documents— one by one the leaves with portraits and with the blacks of the digits of jagunços, lifters of horses and criminouses of death. That application of work, in one thing of those, generated the ire in the people. The undercover, busybodyguard, total close, seated joined, attending, excelling of to be dog. Me made a dread, but solo in the goof of the corpus, not in the intern of the courages. One hour, one of those reports fell— and I bent quickly, I knew there precisely by why, not I wanted, not I thought— even today I raise shame of this— I picked the paper of the ground, and delivered to him. Thereof, I say: I had more rage, because I did that; but there yea it was done. The man not even me looked, not even said notone thankfulment. Event he soles of the shoes of his— solo looking— that soles rough thick, bent of enormous, appearing iron bronzed. Because I knew: This Jazevedao, when he apprehended someone, the primary quiet thing that proceeded was that he came entering, sans to have to to say, feigning some hurry, and go stepping on the top of the feet of the poorthings. And that on these occasions he gave laughters, gave… Well, geck! I delivered to him the leaf of paper, and went leaving of there, by to have hand on me of not to destroy by shots that subject. Meat that much they weigh… And umbilicated beginning of belly pot bellied, that me created will… With my lightness, joyful that I’d kill. But, the barbarities that this delegate made and happened, the Sir not even has callus in heart to be able me to hear. He achieved of many men and women to cry blood, for the simple universolo ours here. Sertão. The Sir knows: sertão is where mandates who is strong, with the guile. And bullet is a tidbit of metal… S’much, I say: Jazevedao— one assuch, should of to have, needed? Ah, need. Leather ruined is that calls goad of point. That there be that, after— business particular of he— in the life or in the other, each Jazevedao, accomplished the that he has, desclimbs in his time of pain, too, until to pay the that he gave— compadre mine Quelemem is there, in order to fiscalize. The Sir knows: the peril that is to live… But solo of the mode, of these, by ugly instrument, was that the jagunsaga so finished. Sir thinks that Antonio Do or Olivino Oliviano were going to fix goodies by pure spelling of itself, or by begging of the infelicitous, or by always to hear sermon of father? You I think! In the aims… Of jagunço comported active in order so to repent in the middle of his jagunsagas, solo I lay of one: called Joe Cazuzo— was in smashing of one shotshow, for on the summit of the place Sierra New, district of river rusted, on the stream Traçadal. We made mal minority small, and they closed in order summit of us the personnel of one Coronel Adalvino, forted politico, with many soldiers uniformed in the center, commanding of the Lieutenant Epiphany Helm, that after fixed captain. We lasted hour more hour, and yea gave almost of encircled. There, of misslip, that Joe Cazuzo— man much valiant— so kneeled turned on the ground of the thick, lifted the arms that not even shoots of Jatoba dry, and solo yell, howl clear and howl deaf:— “I saw the Virgin Ours, in the resplendor of the Heavens, with her children of angels!... ” He screamed not touched. — “I saw the Virgin!... ” He ensouled? We desequaled. Bolt for my horse—that I thought— I leaped in mal seat, noteven I knew in which rupture-time I unfastened the halter, of tied up it foot of timber. I flew, arrived. Bullet come. The pasture roared. In the brush, the fear of the people so goes to the whole, one fear intentional. I could to lash out, fated burro brute, giv-that, giv-that. Some two or three bullets so drovein the pad of the mine saddle, they perforated of to tear away almost much the kapok of the filling. Horse trembled in pro, in middle of gallop, I know: thinks in the owner. I not fit of to be more well shrunken. Bulleted came to the sack that I had on the back, with few mine things. And other, of fusil, in ricochet decreed, heated my thigh, sans me wound, the Sir see: bullet does the what to want—so pierced impressed, between in me and the harness! Times crazy… Burumbum!: the horse so kneeled in the fall, dead perhaps, and I yea falling for front, embraced in foliage full, branched and linias, that me swayed and skewered, done I was pendulating in web of spider… Whither? I traversed that life total… Of fear of anxiety, I ruptured to read with mine corpus that forest, I know there — and me fell world below, rolled for the hollow of a grotto closed of shrubs, always me grasped— rolled same assuch: after: after, when I saw mine hands, total on they that not was withdrawn sanguine, was smeared green, on the digits, of leaves living that I pulled and mashed… I landed on the sedge of the profound— and a beast dark gave a releap, with a sneeze, too mad of fright: that was a papa-mel, that I descried; in order to flee, this is solely. Bigger being I, me doused mine overcoat; I spigotted total. And of one bit of thought: if that beast irara lying there then there not had cobra. I took the place of his. Existed cobra notone. I could me to lose. I was solo spineless, softness, but that not deadened, inside, the collisions of the heart. I gasped. I conceived that they came, me kill. Not even did mal, me mattered not. Assuch, some moments, at least I guarded the license of term in order me to rest. Conforming I thought in Diadorim. Solo I thought was in he. One joão-congo sang. I wanted to die thinking in my friend Diadorim, hand-o-bro, who was on the Sierra of WoodO’Bow, almost on the border baiana, with our other half of the so-candelarios… With my friend Diadorim me embraced, sentiment my went-flew right for he… Ay, arr, but: that this mine mouth not has order notone. I am accounting outside, things divagated. In the Sir me confide? Til-that, til-that. Say the angel-of-the-guard… But, conforming I came: after so knew, that same the soldiers of the Lieutenant and the goats of Coronel Adalvino remitted of to respect the blast of that Joe Cazuzo. And that this ended being the man most pacificious of the world, fabricator of oil and sacristan, in the Saint Sundays White. Times! For total, cleaned revelation, I fix thinking. I like. Meliorate, for the idea if well to open, is travelling in train-of-iron. Could, lived to top and to bottom, inside of it. Information that I ask: same in the Heavens, end of end, how is that the soul wins so to forget s’much sufferments and maladies, in the received and in the given? The how? The Sir knows: are things of hideous ofmuch, have. Pain of corpus and pain of idea mark forted, that forted as the total love and rage of hate. Goes, sea… Of luck that, then, the Firmiano, by appellationed Louse-of-Snake, so leoprosized with the leg disconformed, thickening, of that disease that not so cures; and not discern almost more, constant the branchials in the eyes, of the cataracts. Of before, years, had to of so disarray of the jagunsaga. Well, one occasion, some was on the ranch of his, on the High Jeuitai, after accounted—that, turns time, comes subject, he would say: “Me give yearning is of to seize a soldier, and such, for one good flay, with knife blind… But, first, to castrate…” The Sir conceive? Who has more dose of demon in self is Indian, any race of brusque. Folk see nation ofthese, for there profound of the generals of Goias, theofwhere has vagarous grand rivers, of aquas always so clear pleasantly, running of down crystal rosed… Louse-of-Snake gave of sanguine of heathen. Sir me will say: but that he pronounced that out of mouth, manner of to represent that yet not was old decadent. Opus of to oppose, for fear of to be tame, and cause in order so to see respected. Total listened for such rule: palavered of ruins, for more so valued, because we to the environs is hard durability. The worst, but, is that they finish, through the same ford, given of one day to execute the declared, in the real. I saw s’much crudity! Pain not pays to account; if I go, I collide. And me dedrip, three that me sicken, this total. Me convokes that the personnel, today in day, is good of heart. This is, good in the trivial. Malices wildwants, and perversities, always have some, but scarcities. Generation mine, true, was not assuch. Ah, goes to turn a time, in which not is used more to kill people… I yea am old. Good, I was saying: question, this that me excavates… Ah, I formed that question, for compadre mine Quelemem. That me responded: that, for close to heaven, we so amplified so, that total the uglies past so exhaled of not to be—fated sans-modus from time of youngster, mal-arts. As we not lack of to have remorse of the which divulged in the pulsation of his nightmares of one night. Assuch that: fleeced-so, flourished-so! Ahem. For this said, is that the journey to the Heavens is delayed. I confide with compadre mine Quelemem, the Sir knows: reason of creed same that has—that, for total the mal, that so does, one day so repays, the exact. Subject assuch rises three times, in ante of to want to facilitate in any minutia reprehensible… Compadre mine Quelemem never speaks vacant, not subtreats. Solo that this to he not I go to expose. We never should have to declare that accept entire the alien—that is what is the rule of the king! The Sir look…see: the most important and beautiful, of the world, is this: that the people are not always same, still were not completed — but that they go always shifting. They tune or detune. Truth major. Is the that the life me taught. This that me animates, mound. And, other thing: the devil and the brutes; but Deus is treacherous! Ah, a beauty of treacherous— gives like! The force of his, when he wants— boy!— me gives the fear dread! Deus comes coming: no one not sees. He does in the law of gentle— assuch is the miracle. And Deus attacks beautiful, so amusing, so economizes. The well: one day in a tannery, the little knife mine I had dropped inside of a tank, solo soup of bark of tan, stryphnodendron adstringens, angico, there I know. —“Tomorrow I try…”— I said, withmyself. Because it was of night, light notone I not disputed. Ah, then, I found: on the other day, early, the knife, the iron of it, had been gnawed, almost by half, by that aqua dark, total quiet. I left, for more to see. Crack, fuse! Know the what was? Well, in that same of afternoon, there: of the little knife solo so found the handle… The handle, for not to be of cold metal, but of horn of deer. There is: Deus… Good, the Sir heard knows, the that knows me understands… We sum, not think that religion fractures. Sir think the contrary. Visible that, those other times, I painted—belief that the neoglaziovia variegata lifts the flower. Ah, good my joy… Boyhood. But boyhood is task for more later so to deny. Too, I of that of to think in vague in s’much, lost mine hand-of-man for the management hot, in the middle of all. But, today, that I ratiocinated, and think the endeavor, not nor for this not I give for low my competence, in a fire-and-iron. The to see. Would approach would come here with war on me, with bad parts, with other laws, or with excessive looks, and I even draw to ignite this zone, ay, if, if! Is in the mouth of the blunderbuss: is in the rete-te-tem… And lonelyonly not I am, there-of-the. For not this, I was I placed encircle my mine people. Look the Sir: here, close, vereda below, the Paspe — cropper my — is mine. More league, if that, have the Herpetotheres, and have the compadre Ciril, him and three children, I know that they serve. Band of that hand, the Alaripe: knew the Sir the that is that so boasts, in rifleation and by the knife, one cearense did this! After more: the João Innatal, the Quipes, Lophiosilurus-of-claws. And the Fafafa— this gave fights high, all side with me, in the combat old of the Anteater-such: we cleaned the wind of whom not had order of to respirate, and ante these we desencompassed… The Fafafa has a mass of mares. He raises horses good. Even a little more distant, on the ped-of-sierra, of band mine was the Sesfred, Jesualdo, the Nelson, and João Concliz. Some others. The Triol… And not I go valuing? I leave terra with them, of theirs the what is mine is, we close that we not even brothers. For what I want to gather richness? They are there, of arms aireated. Enemy to come, we cross called, gathering: is hour of one good shotshowerment in peace, they exp’riment to see. I say this to the Sir, of confidence. Too, not go to think in double. We want is to work, propose tranquility. Of me, person, I live for mine woman, that total mode-meliorate merits, and for the devotion. Well-to want of mine woman was that me assisted, prayers of hers, graces. Love comes of love. I say. In Diadorim, I think too— but Diadorim is the mine nebulina… Now, well: not I wanted to touch on this more— of the Tineaous; arrive. But has a nevertheless: I ask: the Sir believe, think trust of truth in that parlance, of with the demon so to able to deal with pact? No, no is no? I knew that not there. I spoke of favas. But I like of total good confirmation. To vend you proper soul… Inventionate false! And, soul, the what is? Soul of has to be thing internal supremed, much more of the of inside, and is solo, of the that one if thought: ah, soul sheer! Decision of to vend soul is fearless moll, fantasied of moment, has not the obedience legal. Can I to vend those good terras, thereof of between the Veredas-Four— that are of one Mr. Admiral, who resides in the capital federal? Can I some? Then, if one boy boy is, and for this not so authorizes of to negotiate… And we, this I know, at times is solo fated boy. Mal that in mine life I prepared, I was in a certain infancy in dreams — total runs and arrives so swift —; will be that if hath flame of responsibilities? If dream; yea so did… I gave rapadura to the chump! Ahem. Well. If his soul, and has, it is of Deus established, not even that the person want or not want. Not is vendible. The Sir not thinks? Me declare, frank, I beg. Ah, you I appreciate. You so see that the Sir knows much, in idea firm, beyond of to have letter of doctor. You I appreciate, for much. Your company me gives high pleasures. In terms, I liked that I would live here, or close, was a help. Here not so has conviviation that to instruct. Sertão. Knows the Sir: sertão is where the thought of the people so forms more forted of the than power of the place. To live is much perilous… Eh, that you so go? Yeayea? Is that not. Today, no. Tomorrow, no. Not I consense. The Sir me forgive, but in endeavor of mine friendship accept: the Sir stay. After fifth of-morning-early, the Sir wanting to go, then goes, same me leaves feeling your absence. But, today or tomorrow, no. Visit, here in house, with me, is for three days! But, the Sir really intends to trespass the field this sea of territotires, for sortment of to confer the what exists? You have your motives. Now— I say for me — the Sir comes, came late, Times were, the customs mutate. Almost that, of legitimate loyal, little surplus, not even no excess more nothing. The bands good of valientoughs they reparted their end; many who were jagunço, by ouch pain, beg alms. Same as the herdsmen they doubt of to come in the commerce vested of clothes entire of leather, they think that garb of jerkin is ugly and boor. And even the herd in the shrubbed pasture goes waning less mad, more educated: casted of zebu, dissee with the rest of corralers and captiveborns. Always, in the generals is to the poverty, to the sadness. A sadness that even gladdens. But, then, for a crop reasonable of bizzarancies, I recounsel of the Sir to entest journey more dilated. Not were my desmight, by acids and rheumatism, there I went. I guided the Sir till total. March 2013 San Diego, CA ORIGINAL TEXT NONADA. TIROS QUE O SENHOR ouviu foram de briga de homem não, Deus esteja. Alvejei mira em árvores no quintal, no baixo do córrego. Por meu acerto. Todo dia isso faço, gosto; desde mal em minha mocidade. Daí, vieram me chamar. Causa dumbezerro: um bezerro branco, erroso, os olhos de nem ser – se viu –; e com máscara de cachorro. Me disseram; eu não quis avistar. Mesmo que, por defeito como nasceu, arrebitado de beiços, esse figurava rindo feito pessoa. Cara de gente, cara de cão: determinaram – era o demo. Povo prascóvio. Mataram. Dono dele nem sei quem for. Vieram emprestar minhas armas, cedi. Não tenho abusões. O senhor ri certas risadas... Olhe: quando é tiro de verdade, primeiro a cachorrada pega a latir, instantaneamente – depois, então, se vai ver se deu mortos. O senhor tolere, isto é o sertão. Uns querem que não seja: que situado sertão é por os campos-gerais a fora a dentro, eles dizem, fim de rumo, terras altas, demais do Urucuia. Toleima. Para os de Corinto e do Curvelo, então, o aqui não é dito sertão? Ah, que tem maior! Lugar sertão se divulga: é onde os pastos carecem de fechos; onde um pode torar dez, quinze léguas, sem topar com casa de morador; e onde criminoso vive seu cristo-jesus, arredado do arrocho de autoridade. O Urucuia vem dos montões oestes. Mas, hoje, que na beira dele, tudo dá – fazendões de fazendas, almargem de vargens de bom render, as vazantes; culturas que vão de mata em mata, madeiras de grossura, até ainda virgens dessas lá há. O gerais corre em volta. Esses gerais são sem tamanho. Enfim, cada um o que quer aprova, o senhor sabe: pão ou pães, é questão de opiniães... O sertão está em toda a parte. Do demo? Não gloso. Senhor pergunte aos moradores. Em falso receio, desfalam no nome dele – dizem só: o Que-Diga. Vote! não... Quem muito se evita, se convive. Sentença num Aristides – o que existe no buritizal primeiro desta minha mão direita, chamado a Vereda-da-Vaca-Mansa-deSanta-Rita – todo o mundo crê: ele não pode passar em três lugares, designados: porque então a gente escuta um chorinho, atrás, e uma vozinha que avisando: – “Eu já vou! Eu já vou!...” – que é o capiroto, o que-diga... E um José Simpilício – quem qualquer daqui jura ele tem um capeta em casa, miúdo satanazim, preso obrigado a ajudar em toda ganância que executa; razão que o Simpilício se empresa em vias de completar de rico. Apre, por isso dizem também que a besta pra ele rupeia, nega de banda, não deixando, quando ele quer amontar... Superstição. José Simpilício e Aristides, mesmo estão se engordando, de assim nãoouvir ou ouvir. Ainda o senhor estude: agora mesmo, nestes dias de época, tem gente porfalando que o Diabo próprio parou, de passagem, no Andrequicé. Um Moço de fora, teria aparecido, e lá se louvou que, para aqui vir – normal, a cavalo, dum dia-e-meio – ele era capaz que só com uns vinte minutos bastava... porque costeava o Rio do Chico pelas cabeceiras! Ou, também, quem sabe – sem ofensas – não terá sido, por um exemplo, até mesmo o senhor quem se anunciou assim, quando passou por lá, por prazido divertimento engraçado? Há-de, não me dê crime, sei que não foi. E mal eu não quis. Só que uma pergunta, em hora, às vezes, clareia razão de paz. Mas, o senhor entenda: o tal moço, se há, quis mangar. Pois, hem, que, despontar o Rio pelas nascentes, será a mesma coisa que um se redobrar nos internos deste nosso Estado nosso, custante viagem de uns três meses... Então? Que-Diga? Doideira. A fantasiação. E, o respeito de dar a ele assim esses nomes de rebuço, é que é mesmo um querer invocar que ele forme forma, com as presenças! Não seja. Eu, pessoalmente, quase que já perdi nele a crença, mercês a Deus; é o que ao senhor lhe digo, à puridade. Sei que é bem estabelecido, que grassa nos Santos- Evangelhos. Em ocasião, conversei com um rapaz seminarista, muito condizente, conferindo no livro de rezas e revestido de paramenta, com uma vara de maria-preta na mão – proseou que ia adjutorar o padre, para extraírem o Cujo, do corpo vivo de uma velha, na Cachoeira-dos-Bois, ele ia com o vigário do Campo-Redondo... Me concebo. O senhor não é como eu? Não acreditei patavim. Compadre meu Quelemém descreve que o que revela efeito são os baixos espíritos descarnados, de terceira, fuzuando nas piores trevas e com ânsias de se travarem com os viventes – dão encosto. Compadre meu Quelemém é quem muito me consola – Quelemém de Góis. Mas ele tem de morar longe daqui, na Jijujã, Vereda do Buriti Pardo... Arres, me deixe lá, que – em endemoninhamento ou com encosto – o senhor mesmo deverá de ter conhecido diversos, homens, mulheres. Pois não sim? Por mim, tantos vi, que aprendi. Rincha- Mãe, Sangued’Outro, o Muitos-Beiços, o Rasgaem-Baixo, Faca-Fria, o Fancho-Bode, um Treciziano, o Azinhavre... o Hermógenes... Deles, punhadão. Se eu pudesse esquecer tantos nomes... Não sou amansador de cavalos! E, mesmo, quem de si de ser jagunço se entrete, já é por alguma competência entrante do demônio. Será não? Será? De primeiro, eu fazia e mexia, e pensar não pensava. Não possuía os prazos. Vivi puxando difícil de dificel, peixe vivo no moquém: quem mói no asp’ro, não fantaseia. Mas, agora, feita a folga que me vem, e sem pequenos dessossegos, estou de range rede. E me inventei neste gosto, de especular idéia. O diabo existe e não existe? Dou o dito. Abrenúncio. Essas melancolias. O senhor vê: existe cachoeira; e pois? Mas cachoeira é barranco de chão, e água se caindo por ele, retombando; o senhor consome essa água, ou desfaz o barranco, sobra cachoeira alguma? Viver é negócio muito perigoso... Explico ao senhor: o diabo vige dentro do homem, os crespos do homem – ou é o homem arruinado, ou o homem dos avessos. Solto, por si, cidadão, é que não tem diabo nenhum. Nenhum! – é o que digo. O senhor aprova? Me declare tudo, franco – é alta mercê que me faz: e pedir posso, encarecido. Este caso – por estúrdio que me vejam – é de minha certa importância. Tomara não fosse... Mas, não diga que o senhor, assisado e instruído, que acredita na pessoa dele?! Não? Lhe agradeço! Sua alta opinião compõe minha valia. Já sabia, esperava por ela-já o campo! Ah, a gente, na velhice, carece de ter sua aragem de descanso. Lhe agradeço. Tem diabo nenhum. Nem espírito. Nunca vi. Alguém devia de ver, então era eu mesmo, este vosso servidor. Fosse lhe contar... Bem, o diabo regula seu estado preto, nas criaturas, nas mulheres, nos homens. Até: nas crianças – eu digo. Pois não é ditado: “menino – trem do diabo”? E nos usos, nas plantas, nas águas, na terra, no vento... Estrumes. ... O diabo na rua, no meio do redemunho... Hem? Hem? Ah. Figuração minha, de pior pra trás, as certas lembranças. Mal hajame! Sofro pena de contar não... Melhor, se arrepare: pois, num chão, e com igual formato de ramos e folhas, não dá a mandioca mansa, que se come comum, e a mandioca-brava, que mata? Agora, o senhor já viu uma estranhez? A mandioca-doce pode de repente virar azangada – motivos não sei; às vezes se diz que é por replantada no terreno sempre, com mudas seguidas, de manaíbas – vai em amargando, de tanto em tanto, de si mesma toma peçonhas. E, ora veja: a outra, a mandiocabrava, também é que às vezes pode ficar mansa, a esmo, de se comer sem nenhum mal. E que isso é? Eh, o senhor já viu, por ver, a feiúra de ódio franzido, carantonho, nas faces duma cobra cascavel? Observou o porco gordo, cada dia mais feliz bruto, capaz de, pudesse, roncar e engolir por sua suja comodidade o mundo todo? E gavião, corvo, alguns, as feições deles já representam a precisão de talhar para adiante, rasgar e estraçalhar a bico, parece uma quicé muito afiada por ruim desejo. Tudo. Tem até tortas raças de pedras, horrorosas, venenosas – que estragam mortal a água, se estão jazendo em fundo de poço; o diabo dentro delas dorme: são o demo. Se sabe? E o demo – que é só assim o significado dum azougue maligno – tem ordem de seguir o caminho dele, tem licença para campear?! Arre, ele está misturado em tudo. Que o que gasta, vai gastando o diabo de dentro da gente, aos pouquinhos, é o razoável sofrer. E a alegria de amor – compadre meu Quelemém, diz. Família. Deveras? É, e não é. O senhor ache e não ache. Tudo é e não é... Quase todo mais grave criminoso feroz, sempre é muito bom marido, bom filho, bom pai, e é bom amigo-de-seus-amigos! Sei desses. Só que tem os depois – e Deus, junto. Vi muitas nuvens. Mas, em verdade, filho, também, abranda. Olhe: um chamado Aleixo, residente a légua do Passo do Pubo, no da-Areia, era o homem de maiores ruindades calmas que já se viu. Me agradou que perto da casa dele tinha um açudinho, entre as palmeiras, com traíras, pra-almas de enormes, desenormes, ao real, que receberam fama; o Aleixo dava de comer a elas, em horas justas, elas se acostumaram a se assim das locas, para papar, semelhavam ser peixes ensinados. Um dia, só por graça rústica, ele matou um velhinho que por lá passou, desvalido rogando esmola. O senhor não duvide – tem gente, neste aborrecido mundo, que matam só para ver alguém fazer careta... Eh, pois, empós, o resto o senhor prove: vem o pão, vem a mão, vem o são, vem o cão. Esse Aleixo era homem afamilhado, tinha filhos pequenos; aqueles eram o amor dele, todo, despropósito. Dê bem, que não nem um ano estava passado, de se matar o velhinho pobre, e os meninos do Aleixo aí adoeceram. Andaço de sarampão, se disse, mas complicado; eles nunca saravam. Quando, então, sararam. Mas os olhos deles vermelhavam altos, numa inflama de sapiranga à rebelde; e susseguinte – o que não sei é se foram todos duma vez, ou um logo e logo outro e outro – eles restaram cegos. Cegos, sem remissão dum favinho de luz dessa nossa! O senhor imagine: uma escadinha – três meninos e uma menina – todos cegados. Sem remediável. O Aleixo não perdeu o juizo; mas mudou: ah, demudou completo – agora vive da banda de Deus, suando para ser bom e caridoso em todas suas horas da noite e do dia. Parece até que ficou o feliz, que antes não era. Ele mesmo diz que foi um homem de sorte, porque Deus quis ter pena dele, transformar para lá o rumo de sua alma. Isso eu ouvi, e me deu raiva. Razão das crianças. Se sendo castigo, que culpa das hajas do Aleixo aqueles meninozinhos tinham?! Compadre meu Quelemém reprovou minhas incertezas. Que, por certo, noutra vida revirada, os meninos também tinham sido os mais malvados, da massa e peça do pai, demônios do mesmo caldeirão de lugar. Senhor o que acha? E o velhinho assassinado? – eu sei que o senhor vai discutir. Pois, também. Em ordem que ele tinha um pecado de crime, no corpo, por pagar. Se a gente – conforme compadre meu Quelemém é quem diz – se a gente torna a encarnar renovado, eu cismo até que inimigo de morte pode vir como filho do inimigo. Mire veja: se me digo, tem um sujeito Pedro Pindó, vizinho daqui mais seis léguas, homem de bem por tudo em tudo, ele e a mulher dele, sempre sidos bons, de bem. Eles têm um filho duns dez anos, chamado Valtei – nome moderno, é o que o povo daqui agora apreceia, o senhor sabe. Pois essezinho, essezim, desde que algum entendimento alumiou nele, feito mostrou o que é: pedido madrasto, azedo queimador, gostoso de ruim de dentro do fundo das espécies de sua natureza. Em qual que judia, ao devagar, de todo bicho ou criaçãozinha pequena que pega; uma vez, encontrou uma crioula bentabêbada dormindo, arranjou um caco de garrafa, lanhou em três pontos a popa da perna dela. O que esse menino babeja vendo, é sangrarem galinha ou esfaquear porco. – “Eu gosto de matar...” – uma ocasião ele pequenino me disse. Abriu em mim um susto; porque: passarinho que se debruça – o vôo já está pronto! Pois, o senhor vigie: o pai, Pedro Pindó, modo de corrigir isso, e a mãe, dão nele, de miséria e mastro – botam o menino sem comer, amarram em árvores no terreiro, ele nu nuelo, mesmo em junho frio, lavram o corpinho dele na peia e na taca, depois limpam a pele do sangue, com cuia de salmoura. A gente sabe, espia, fica gasturado. O menino já rebaixou de magreza, os olhos entrando, carinha de ossos, encaveirada, e entisicou, o tempo todo tosse, tossura da que puxa secos peitos. Arre, que agora, visível, o Pindó e a mulher se habituaram de nele bater, de pouquinho em pouquim foram criando nisso um prazer feio de diversão – como regulam as sovas em horas certas confortáveis, até chamam gente para ver o exemplo bom. Acho que esse menino não dura, já está no blimbilim, não chega para a quaresma que vem... Uê-uê, então?!Não sendo como compadre meu Quelemém quer, que explicação é que o senhor dava? Aquele menino tinha sido homem. Devia, em balanço, terríveis perversidades. Alma dele estava no breu. Mostrava. E, agora, pagava. Ah, mas, acontece, quando está chorando e penando, ele sofre igual que se fosse um menino bonzinho... Ave, vi de tudo, neste mundo! lá vi até cavalo com soluço... – o que é a coisa mais custosa que há. Bem, mas o senhor dirá, deve de: e no começo – para pecados e artes, as pessoas – como por que foi que tanto emendado se começou? Ei, ei, aí todos esbarram. Compadre meu Quelemém, também. Sou só um sertanejo, nessas altas idéias navego mal. Sou muito pobre coitado. Inveja minha pura é de uns conforme o senhor, com toda leitura e suma doutoração. Não é que eu esteja analfabeto. Soletrei, anos e meio, meante cartilha, memória e palmatória. Tive mestre, Mestre Lucas, no Curralinho, decorei gramática, as operações, regra-de-três, até geografia e estudo pátrio. Em folhas grandes de papel, com capricho tracei bonitos mapas. Ah, não é por falar: mas, desde o começo, me achavam sofismado de ladino. E que eu merecia de ir para cursar latim, em Aula Régia – que também diziam. Tempo saudoso! Inda hoje, apreceio um bom livro, despaçado. Na fazenda O Limãozinho, de um meu amigo Vito Soziano, se assina desse almanaque grosso, de logogrifos e charadas e outras divididas matérias, todo ano vem. Em tanto, ponho primazia é na leitura proveitosa, vida de santo, virtudes e exemplos – missionário esperto engambelando os índios, ou São Francisco de Assis, Santo Antônio, São Geraldo... Eu gosto muito de moral. Raciocinar, exortar os outros para o bom caminho, aconselhar a justo. Minha mulher, que o senhor sabe, zela por mim: muito reza. Ela é uma abençoável. Compadre meu Quelemém sempre diz que eu posso aquietar meu temer de consciência, que sendo bem-assistido, terríveis bons-espíritos me protegem. Ipe! Com gosto... Como é de são efeito, ajudo com meu querer acreditar. Mas nem sempre posso. O senhor saiba: eu toda a minha vida pensei por mim, forro, sou nascido diferente. Eu sou é eu mesmo. Diverjo de todo o mundo... Eu quase que nada não sei. Mas desconfio de muita coisa. O senhor concedendo, eu digo: para pensar longe, sou cão mestre – o senhor solte em minha frente uma idéia ligeira, e eu rastreio essa por fundo de todos os matos, amém! Olhe: o que devia de haver, era de se reunirem-se os sábios, políticos, constituições gradas, fecharem o definitivo a noção – proclamar por uma vez, artes assembléias, que não tem diabo nenhum, não existe, não pode. Valor de lei! Só assim, davam tranqüilidade boa à gente. Por que o Governo não cuida?! Ah, eu sei que não é possível. Não me assente o senhor por beócio. Uma coisa é pôr idéias arranjadas, outra é lidar com país de pessoas, de carne e sangue, de mil-e-tantas misérias... Tanta gente – dá susto de saber – e nenhum se sossega: todos nascendo, crescendo, se casando, querendo colocação de emprego, comida, saúde, riqueza, ser importante, querendo chuva e negócios bons... De sorte que carece de se escolher: ou a gente se tece de viver no safado comum, ou cuida só de religião só. Eu podia ser: padre sacerdote, se não chefe de jagunços; para outras coisas não fui parido. Mas minha velhice já principiou, errei de toda conta. E o reumatismo... Lá como quem diz: nas escorvas. Ahã. Hem? Hem? O que mais penso, testo e explico: todo-omundo é louco. O senhor, eu, nós, as pessoas todas. Por isso é que se carece principalmente de religião: para se desendoidecer, desdoidar. Reza é que sara da loucura. No geral. Isso é que é a salvaçãoda- alma... Muita religião, seu moço! Eu cá, não perco ocasião de religião. Aproveito de todas. Bebo água de todo rio... Uma só, para mim é pouca, talvez não me chegue. Rezo cristão, católico, embrenho a certo; e aceito as preces de compadre meu Quelemém, doutrina dele, de Cardéque. Mas, quando posso, vou no Mindubim, onde um Matias é crente, metodista: a gente se acusa de pecador, lê alto a Bíblia, e ora, cantando hinos belos deles. Tudo me quieta, me suspende. Qualquer sombrinha me refresca. Mas é só muito provisório. Eu queria rezar – o tempo todo. Muita gente não me aprova, acham que lei de Deus é privilégios, invariável. E eu! Bofe! Detesto! O que sou? – o que faço, que quero, muito curial. E em cara de todos faço, executado. Eu não tresmalho! Olhe: tem uma preta, Maria Leôncia, longe daqui não mora, as rezas dela afamam muita virtude de poder. Pois a ela pago, todo mês – encomenda de rezar por mim um terço, todo santo dia, e, nos domingos, um rosário. Vale, se vale. Minha mulher não vê mal nisso. E estou, já mandei recado para uma outra, do Vau-Vau, uma Izina Calanga, para vir aqui, ouvi de que reza também com grandes meremerências, vou efetuar com ela trato igual. Quero punhado dessas, me defendendo em Deus, reunidas de mim em volta... Chagas de Cristo! Viver é muito perigoso... Querer o bem com demais força, de incerto jeito, pode já estar sendo se querendo o mal, por principiar. Esses homens! Todos puxavam o mundo para si, para o concertar consertado. Mas cada um só vê e entende as coisas dum seu modo. Montante, o mais supro, mais sério – foi Medeiro Vaz. Que um homem antigo... Seu Joãozinho Bem-Bem, o mais bravo de todos, ninguém nunca pôde decifrar como ele por dentro consistia. Joca Ramiro – grande homem príncipe! – era político. Zé- Bebelo quis ser político. (shrink)

Les principes de la didactique narrative de la philosophie sont justifiés théoriquement. Or, il y a un fossé entre la théorie et la pratique, qui n’est comblé ni par Rehfus ni par Martens. Martens définit les philosophes comme experts de certaines communautés scientifiques. Le dialogue avec les étudiants, en tant qu’activité pragmatique systématique, est le lieu de la philosophie. « La didactique de la philosophie est ŕ la fois la connaissance et l’aptitude ŕ l’autodétermination commune. » Cependant, ce partenariat dialogique (...) reste une construction postulée. La position de Rehfus affirme la męme chose, en prétendant que la conscience de la modernité traverse une crise et que, par conséquent, la philosophie pourrait aider ŕ rétablir l’identité du moi. Pourtant, l’école ne peut résoudre le problčme d’évaluation du processus de rétablissement du moi. Les concepts et les constructions théoriques ne sont toutefois pas identiques ŕ la réalité: ce ne sont que des instruments heuristiques. La société et l’histoire ne sont pas des constructions monistes qui doivent ętre saisies par la pensée, mais des possibilités qui doivent ętre comprises dans le fond. Adopter le récit contribue ŕ la propédeutique scientifique en fournissant une approche valable pour la narration. (shrink)

La position résolument extensionaliste de Quine a été appuyée par des arguments de nature différente, dans ses multiples articles destinés à rejeter le projet de logique modale. On peut classer ces arguments en trois catégories : un argument naturaliste, où l’auteur tente de baser le langage scientifique sur une notation tâchée de décrire la “structure ultime de la réalité” ; un argument esthétique, où Quine fait allusion à des raisons de clarté et d’efficacité démonstrative pour privilégier la théorie des fonctions (...) de vérité ; un argument pratique, dans la mesure où Quine défend la logique classique sur la base du “principe de mutilation minimum”. A travers une étude de ses écrits relatifs aux attitudes propositionnelles, nous montrerons que la philosophie de la logique de Quine a prolongé la partie épistémologique de son oeuvre, optant finalement pour une stratégie de réduction naturaliste des intensions, à l’image du mouvement engagé par Word and Object et prolongé par From Stimulus to Science. Ce projet se soldera par un échec relatif, et Quine résumera cette désillusion par un fossé entre les structures du langage et du monde : la thèse du “monisme anomal” de Davidson sera le dernier mot, amer, du défenseur acharné de la logique classique. (shrink)

Au sortir de la guerre, Merleau-Ponty considérait que tout ce qu’on croyait pensé et bien pensé – la liberté et les pouvoirs, la citoyenneté – est en ruine. En 1960, la Préface de Signes semble reconduire le constat, attestant cette fois de l’échec des philosophies de l’histoire dont les Aventures de la dialectique dessinaient le premier volet. Si la critique marxienne apparaissait contribuer à la clarté politique et constituer la réponse adéquate à une période de crise, quelle opportunité reste-t-il au (...) philosophe une fois la rupture avec le marxisme consommée? A l’abandon pur et simple de la philosophie politique suggéré par les interprètes et par le texte de Merleau-Ponty lui-même en certains endroits – « n’est-ce pas un incroyable malentendu si tous les philosophes ou presque se sont crus obligés d’avoir une politique? » (S, 13) – il faut préférer l’alternative de la philosophie militante, mentionnée à partir de 1956 en deux lieux textuels, seule issue possible d’une philosophie ayant abandonné ses droits au système sans se résoudre au mutisme – soit, dans une perspective encore marxiste, l’après devenir-monde de la philosophie. Comment dès lors conjuguer l’apparition du syntagme en 1946, où il semble réservé à la pensée de Marx par contraste avec la philosophie triomphante hégélienne, et son maintien hors du cadre de référence marxien, lorsque ce dernier est devenu, selon les dires de Merleau-Ponty lui-même, un auteur qu’il convient de méditer à la manière d’un classique? L’insuccès des pensées systématiques de l’histoire et des figures classiques de l’engagement (Sartre, Boukharine) dévoile la nécessité pour Merleau-Ponty d’interroger continument son expérience politique et la raison d’être de son militantisme, inscrit dans la chair de l’histoire.As the war ended, Merleau-Ponty considered that everything thought to be good and well thought – freedom, powers, citizenship – was in ruin. In 1960, the Preface to Signs seems to replicate this realization, attesting this time to the failure of philosophies of history of which Adventures of the Dialectic sketched the first phase. If the Marxist critique appeared to contribute to political clarity and to consist in an adequate response to a period of crisis, what opportunities remain for philosophy once the rupture with Marxism is finalized? To the pure and simple abandonment of political philosophy suggested by interpreters and by Merleau-Ponty’s text itself in certain instances – “Is it not an incredible misunderstanding that all, or almost all, philosophers have felt obliged to have a politics?” (S, 5) – one must favor the alternative of militant philosophy, first mentioned in 1956 in two textual locations. This alternative is the only outcome possible for a philosophy that has abandoned its rights to the system without resolving itself to silence. It is, from a still-Marxist perspective, the post becoming-world of philosophy. How, then, can we reconcile the appearance of the phrase in 1946 – where it seems reserved to Marxist thought in contrast with the triumphant Hegelian philosophy – with its retention outside of Marxist references, even as Marx has become, according to Merleau-Ponty himself, a writer who should be reflected upon as a classic? For Merleau-Ponty, the failure of systematic theories of history and of traditional figures of engagement (Sartre, Bukharin) reveals the necessity to continuously interrogate his own political experience and the ground of his militancy, inscribed in the flesh of history.Alla fine della guerra, Merleau-Ponty considerava che tutto ciò che credevamo ben fatto e ben pensato – la libertà e i poteri, la cittadinanza – fosse in rovina. Nel 1960, la Prefazione a Segni sembra ribadire questa constatazione, attestando questa volta il fallimento delle filosofie della storia di cui le Avventure della dialettica disegnavano la prima componente. Se la critica marxiana sembrava contribuire alla chiarezza politica e costituire la risposta adeguata a un periodo di crisi, quale opportunità resta al filosofo una volta consumata la rottura con il marxismo? All’abbandono puro e semplice della filosofia politica suggerito dagli interpreti, nonché in certi passaggi dei testi dello stesso Merleau-Ponty, bisognerebbe preferire l’alternativa della filosofia militante, menzionata a partire dal 1956 in due passaggi, sola via d’uscita possibile da una filosofia che ha ceduto i propri diritti al sistema e che però non vuole ridursi al mutismo. O invece, in una prospettiva ancora marxista, l’epoca successiva al divenire-mondo della filosofia. Come coniugare allora l’apparizione del sintagma nel 1946, apparentemente riservato al pensiero di Marx in contrasto con la filosofia hegeliana trionfante, con la sua salvaguardia fuori dal quadro di riferimento marxiano, dal momento in cui quest’ultimo è diventato, secondo lo stesso Merleau-Ponty, un autore sui cui è necessario riflettere alla maniera di un classico? L’insuccesso delle filosofie sistematiche della storia e delle figure classiche dell’impegno (Sartre, Bucharin) rivela la necessità per Merleau-Ponty d’interrogare continuamente la sua esperienza politica e la ragion d’essere della sua militanza, iscritta nella carne della storia. (shrink)

Entre Hegel, "le philosophe du christianisme", et Girard, "l'anthropologue du christianisme", il y a un fossé de deux siècles marqués par une montée considérable de la violence dont Auschwitz et Hiroshima restent les premiers sommets. Cette "montée aux extrêmes" que Hegel n'avait pas prévue, son contemporain Clausewitz l'a parfaitement perçue. Si Hegel et Clausewitz sont "les deux grands penseurs de la guerre", seul Clausewitz permet de penser l'actuel et terrible phénomène du terrorisme. De même, si Hegel décrit le devenir historique (...) comme une triomphante "Odyssée de l'esprit", Girard, à la lumière de Clausewitz, mais aussi d'Hölderlin, en révèle le sens apocalyptique. Le passage de Hegel à Girard est donc celui "de la guerre au terrorisme" et de "l'Odyssée de l'esprit à l'Apocalypse". (shrink)

L’atmosphère« Atmosphère » est un terme employé communément par des auteurs dans le domaine de l’esthétique que dans celui de la météorologie. Ils le comprennent pourtant de manière assez différente, chacun prétendant que leur emploi est la plus fondamentale et que l’autre est seulement métaphorique. Pour les esthéticiens, l’atmosphère réelle est une aura qui émane des choses et qui affecte nos humeurs et nos motivations; pour les météorologistes, il s’agit de l’enveloppe gazeuse qui entoure la planète. Je montre que les (...) deux sens excluent l’air ou le réduisent à un éther immatériel. D’une part, pour la science météorologique, tout se passe comme l’air était enfermé à l’intérieur et considéré comme un ensemble d’effets mesurables et calculables. D’autre part,l’esthétique de l’affect a relié l’atmosphère aux formes solides des artéfacts et des paysages. En ramenant le medium aérien, je cherche une signification de l’atmosphère qui transcende l’opposition entre l’affectif et le météorologique. Je le fais en suivant Merleau-Ponty, qui traite l’atmosphère comme un espace d’inspiration et d’expiration. En tant que tel, il correspond étroitement à ce que Merleau-Ponty lui-même appelle la « chair ». Ce concept pourrait aussi être traduit par « meshwork » (réseau/filet/grillage), référant à ces faisceaux de lignes et de chemins par lesquels chaque être humain est cousu à la fabrique du monde. Pour Merleau-Ponty, la portée de la notion de chair réside dans l’affirmation que la perception est fondamentalement réversible. On ne peut être sentant que dans un monde sentant; c’est pourquoi, comme il le soutient, notre perception des choses dans l’environnement répond à la perception par l’environnementde notre soi. Cependant, je soutiens au contraire que ces deux mouvements d’inspiration et d’expiration ne sont pas le contraire exact l’un de l’autre. Comme le mouvement de la brasse en nataion, le premier est un mouvement de rassemblement et le second de propulsion. Nous inhalons l’atmosphère, mais nous exhalons selon les lignes du réseau. Bref, réseau et atmosphère sont deux côtés de la chair, et c’est dans leur alternance rythmique que nous trouvons la relation entre les lignes et le temps météorologique, qui est, comme je le soutiens, fondamental à la vie.L’atmosfera‘Atmosfera’ è una parola usata comunemente tanto da chi scrive di estetica come dai metereologi. Ciononostante, essi intendono con ciò delle cose piuttosto differenti, ognuno ritenendo che il proprio e il senso più fondamentale mentre l’altrui è meramente metaforico. Per chi si occupa di estetica, l’atmosfera reale è un’aura che emana dalle cose e affetta il nostro umore e le nostre motivazioni; per i metereologi è l’involucro gassoso che circonda il pianeta. Mostro come entrambi i sensi trascurano l’aria, o la riducono a un etere immateriale. Da una parte, per la scienza metereologica, è come se l’aria fosse stata portata al chiuso e presentata come una serie di effetti misurabili e calcolati. Dall’altra, l’estetica dell’affetto ha legato l’atmosfera alle forme solide degli artefatti e dei paesaggi.Nel reintrodurre l’ambiente aereo, intendo trovare un significato di atmosfera che trascenda l’opposizione tra i sensi affettivo e meteorologico. Faccio questo, seguendo Merleau-Ponty, trattando l’atmosfera come uno spazio di inalazione e esalazione. Come tale, corrisponde da vicino a ciò che Merleau-Ponty stesso chiama “la carne”. Ma questo concetto potrebbe anche essere tradotto come ‘reticolo’ (meshwork), riferendosi a quei grovigli di linee e percorsi lungo i quali ogni essere vivente è cucito al tessuto del mondo. Per Merleau-Ponty, il significato della carne risiede nella sua affermazione secondo la quale la percezione è fondamentalmente reversibile. Si può essere senzienti soltanto in un mondo senziente; quindi, ritiene il filosofo, la nostra percezione delle cose nell’ambienteè ricambiata dalla percezione che quest’ultimo ha di noi. Io mostro, al contrario, che questi due movimenti, corrispondenti all’inalazione e all’esalazione, non sono l’esatto rovescio l’uno dell’altro. Come nella bracciata a stile libero nel nuoto, il primo è un movimento di raccolta, il secondo un movimento di propulsione. Ovverossia, inaliamo l’atmosfera, ma esaliamo secondo le linee del reticolo. In breve, il reticolo e l’atmosfera sono due facce della carne, e troviamo nella loro alternanza ritmica la relazione tra le linee e il tempo che, come sostengo, è fondamentale alla vita. (shrink)

Résumé: Après la promulgation de la loi sur le mariage de la République populaire de Chine en 1950, les œuvres littéraires dérivées du besoin de publicité ont des implications politiques et une signification disciplinaire distinctes. Parce que le problème du divorce a la rationalité des “droits libres” et la sensibilité de l’agitation sociale, le récit du “divorce” à cette époque se situe dans une certaine mesure entre la politique et la réalité. D’une part, les œuvres littéraires doivent promouvoir positivement le (...) concept juridique de “liberté de divorce” et, d’autre part, elles doivent être soumises à un traitement narratif insensible. Les récits de divorce sont donc vagues et capricieux. Toutefois, la littérature a comblé dans une certaine mesure le fossé entre la loi et la réalité en réimaginant les problèmes réels causés par le divorce. (shrink)

La 4ème de couverture indique : "Si le futur a de tout temps inquiété les hommes, le futur du droit, traditionnellement, préoccupe peu les juristes. Ceux-ci se concentrent sur son passé (l'histoire du droit) et son actualité (le "droit positif"). Aujourd'hui, cependant, interroger l'avenir du droit devient de plus en plus nécessaire à mesure que celui-ci ne parvient plus à s'adapter à son environnement - formellement autant que matériellement -, à mesure que le fossé se creuse par rapport aux nouvelles (...) sociétés, économies, cultures, technologies, etc. La situation pourrait d'ailleurs sembler exaltante aux yeux des juristes tant il reste beaucoup de concepts, catégories, méthodes, modèles, principes, techniques légistiques et régimes juridiques à inventer. La faculté d'anticipation est une condition de survie. En droit comme ailleurs, et plus que jamais, il convient de ne pas entrer dans l'avenir à reculons. Plutôt que d'adopter l'attitude du pompier qui réagit à l'événement et tente d'en limiter les conséquences négatives, mieux vaut peut-être épouser la conduite du stratège qui cherche à provoquer les meilleurs changements. C'est pourquoi ce livre interroge la possibilité et l'opportunité d'importer les fins et les moyens de la prospective au sein de la recherche juridique. La prospective juridique est une anticipation scientifique et critique visant à éclairer l'action présente à la lumière des futurs du droit possibles et du futur du droit souhaitable. Par nature, les juristes s'intéressent aux lois en vigueur, aux jurisprudences classiques et aux doctrines bien établies, non au droit prospectif. Mais certains, notamment dans les universités, pourraient étudier le droit à venir et, ce faisant, jouer un rôle d'éclaireurs et de guides, favorisant la capacité d'anticipation et la proactivité de tous les acteurs du droit. La prospective juridique s'affirmerait alors telle une nouvelle branche de la recherche juridique.". (shrink)

Nous, êtres humains, sommes issus d'une longue évolution, minérale et cosmique d'abord, biologique et terrestre ensuite. Pour certains, nous aurions définitivement rompu avec un héritage ancestral qui faisait de nous des bêtes. Nous seuls serions capables du sens du bien et du sens du beau. Nous seuls serions doués de morale. Il existerait ainsi un fossé infranchissable entre le grand philosophe Emmanuel Kant et nos cousins les chimpanzés! Ou bien, au contraire, faut-il considérer que la morale et l'esthétique chez l'homme (...) plongent leurs racines dans le terreau de la «nature»? Les animaux ne sont-ils pas eux aussi capables de dévouement pour leurs proches? Nos cousins les primates ne peuvent-ils pas éprouver eux aussi des sentiments en face d'une belle chimpanzé? Bref, la découverte des «cultures animales» n'amène-t-elle pas à concevoir davantage de continuité entre l'homme et l'animal? (shrink)

Logique et existenceDeleuze à propos des « conditions du réel »Pour Deleuze, l’un des problèmes fondamentaux d’une théorie de la pensée est de savoir comment la pensée peut quitter la sphère du possible pour penser le réel, c’est-àdire pour penser l’existence elle-même. La position du réel semble être hors du concept. Des pré-kantiens comme Leibniz approchaient ce problème par le biais de la distinction entre vérités d’essence et vérités d’existence, alors que des post-kantiens comme Maimon l’approchaient par la distinction entre (...) les conditions de l’expérience possible et celles de l’expérience réelle. La logique classique définit la sphère du possible par trois principes logiques – l’identité, la non-contradiction et le tiers-exclu – et la présente étude examine les trois grandes trajectoires qui, dans cette histoire de la philosophie, ont tenté d’utiliser l’un de ces trois principes classiques pour pénétrer l’existence ellemême : 1) Leibniz (et les pré-kantiens) cherchait à étendre le principe de d’identité àl’existence entière ; 2) Hegel (et les post-kantiens) cherchait à étendre le principe de non-contradiction à la totalité de l’expérience ; et 3) le groupe des penseurs appelés de manière assez large « existentialistes » cherchait à étendre le principe du tiers-exclu à la totalité de l’existence. La conclusion examine les raisons pour lesquelles Deleuze a été fasciné par chacune de ces tentatives philosophiques pour « penser l’existence », tout en pensant néanmoins qu’elles ont toutes échoué ; et pourquoi aussi il a fini par développer sa propre réponse au problème en faisant appel à un principe de différence.Logica e EsistenzaLe ‘Condizioni del reale’ in DeleuzePer Deleuze, uno dei problemi fondamentali per una teoria del pensiero è: come può il pensiero abbandonare la sfera del possibile per pensare il reale, ossia, pensare l’esistenza stessa? La posizione del reale sembra essere fuori dal concetto. Prekantiani come Leibniz affrontano questo problema in termini di distinzione fra verità dell’essenza e verità dell’esistenza, mentre post-kantiani come Maimon affrontano il problema in termini di distinzione fra condizioni dell’esperienza possibile e condizioni dell’esperienza reale. La logica classica ha definito la sfera del possibile secondo tre principi logici – identità, non-contraddizione, terzo escluso – e questo saggio analizza tre grandi ‘parabole’ della storia della filosofia che hanno tentato di usare uno di questi tre principi della logica per penetrare l’esistenza stessa: (1) Leibniz (e i pre-kantiani) hanno tentato di estendere il principio di identità a tutta l’esistenza; (2) Hegel (ei post-kantiani) hanno tentato di estendere il principio di non-contraddizione a tutta l’esistenza; (3) il gruppo di pensatori (solo approssimativamente legati fra loro) chiamati “esistenzialisti” ha tentato di estendere il principio del terzo escluso all’esistenza. La conclusione analizza sia le ragioni per le quali Deleuze era affascinato da ciascuno di questi tentativi filosofici di “pensare l’esistenza” nonostante fosse convinto che essi avessero fallito, sia i motivi per cui egli in conclusione traccia la propria risposta al problema facendo appello al principio della differenza. (shrink)

Ce livre a pour objet d’évaluer l’apport de la physique quantique à l’explication du phénomène de la conscience. Après un état des lieux d’ordre sémantique, philosophique et neurobiologique de la question de la relation entre cerveau et conscience, les principaux modèles « classiques » actuels de la conscience sont exposés. Nous montrons que ces modèles laissent en suspens deux questions importantes : a) celle d’expliquer la synchronisation quasi-instantanée de régions éloignées du cerveau qui semble nécessaire à la constitution de percepts (...) conscients; b) celle du fossé explicatif qui existe entre l’expérience subjective, relevant de ce que le sujet est capable de ressentir de façon privée, et la description de ses corrélats neurophysiologiques dans le langage de la science, à la troisième personne – comment ces derniers « donnent-ils lieu » à l’expérience subjective?Les approches quantiques de la conscience plus récentes sont alors exposées de façon détaillée. Nous examinons dans quelle mesure elles peuvent contribuer à répondre à ces questions et proposer une représentation unificatrice intégrant les deux aspects psychique et physiologique du phénomène de conscience. (shrink)

L’exemple paroxystique de ceux qui se disent adeptes de la Terre plate révèle le fossé qui sépare le conspirateur du quotidien du participant des théories du complot, mais aussi leur proximité paradoxale avec les anti-conspirationnistes : tous brandissent leur Vérité contre celles des autres. Comment faire contribuer ces postures aujourd’hui irréconciliables à la constitution d’un monde commun?

Pour la plupart des systèmes de représentation de la connaissance orientés concept, l’un des problèmes principaux relève de la commodité technique. A savoir, la représentation de connaissance en termes prototypiques, tout comme la possibilité d’exploiter des formes de raisonnement conceptuel basées sur la typicalité, ne sont pas autorisées. Au contraire, dans les sciences cognitives, il existe des données en faveur de concepts prototypiques, et des formes non-monotoniques de raisonnement conceptuel ont été largement étudiées. Ce fossé cognitif concernant la représentation et (...) le raisonnement constitue un problème pour les systèmes computationnels, puisque l’information prototypique joue un rôle crucial dans plusieurs tâches importantes. Dans la lignée des théories du raisonnement et de la rationalité dites du double processus, nous soutenons que la représentation conceptuelle dans les systèmes computationnels devrait dépendre de (au moins) deux composantes représentationnelles, chacune spécialisée dans le traitement de différents genres de processus de raisonnement. Dans cet article, nous présentons les avantages computationnels de cette approche en termes de double processus, et les comparons brièvement avec d’autres solutions d’orientation logique, adoptées pour traiter du même problème. (shrink)

Clément Rosset critique dans L’Objet singulier la généralité de nos représentations du réel, qui en manqueraient la singularité en projetant sur ses objets d’illusoires identités. Il risque alors un ineffabilisme insatisfaisant dans lequel tombent encore beaucoup de réalistes directs contemporains. Mais on peut confronter ces vues à ce qu’affirme au contraire Jocelyn Benoist dans Concepts de l’adéquation de nos représentations à la singularité du réel. On en gardera la saine prudence sceptique face aux tentations de beaucoup de « nouveaux réalistes (...) » contemporains de brouiller les différences entre l’intentionnel et le réel, sans faire de l’écart entre ces deux niveaux un fossé pour la connaissance. (shrink)

Pour la plupart des systèmes de représentation de la connaissance orientés concept, l’un des problèmes principaux relève de la commodité technique. A savoir, la représentation de connaissance en termes prototypiques, tout comme la possibilité d’exploiter des formes de raisonnement conceptuel basées sur la typicalité, ne sont pas autorisées. Au contraire, dans les sciences cognitives, il existe des données en faveur de concepts prototypiques, et des formes non-monotoniques de raisonnement conceptuel ont été largement étudiées. Ce fossé cognitif concernant la représentation et (...) le raisonnement constitue un problème pour les systèmes computationnels, puisque l’information prototypique joue un rôle crucial dans plusieurs tâches importantes. Dans la lignée des théories du raisonnement et de la rationalité dites du double processus, nous soutenons que la représentation conceptuelle dans les systèmes computationnels devrait dépendre de deux composantes représentationnelles, chacune spécialisée dans le traitement de différents genres de processus de raisonnement. Dans cet article, nous présentons les avantages computationnels de cette approche en termes de double processus, et les comparons brièvement avec d’autres solutions d’orientation logique, adoptées pour traiter du même problème. (shrink)

L’atmosphère« Atmosphère » est un terme employé communément par des auteurs dans le domaine de l’esthétique que dans celui de la météorologie. Ils le comprennent pourtant de manière assez différente, chacun prétendant que leur emploi est la plus fondamentale et que l’autre est seulement métaphorique. Pour les esthéticiens, l’atmosphère réelle est une aura qui émane des choses et qui affecte nos humeurs et nos motivations; pour les météorologistes, il s’agit de l’enveloppe gazeuse qui entoure la planète. Je montre que les (...) deux sens excluent l’air ou le réduisent à un éther immatériel. D’une part, pour la science météorologique, tout se passe comme l’air était enfermé à l’intérieur et considéré comme un ensemble d’effets mesurables et calculables. D’autre part,l’esthétique de l’affect a relié l’atmosphère aux formes solides des artéfacts et des paysages. En ramenant le medium aérien, je cherche une signification de l’atmosphère qui transcende l’opposition entre l’affectif et le météorologique. Je le fais en suivant Merleau-Ponty, qui traite l’atmosphère comme un espace d’inspiration et d’expiration. En tant que tel, il correspond étroitement à ce que Merleau-Ponty lui-même appelle la « chair ». Ce concept pourrait aussi être traduit par « meshwork » (réseau/filet/grillage), référant à ces faisceaux de lignes et de chemins par lesquels chaque être humain est cousu à la fabrique du monde. Pour Merleau-Ponty, la portée de la notion de chair réside dans l’affirmation que la perception est fondamentalement réversible. On ne peut être sentant que dans un monde sentant; c’est pourquoi, comme il le soutient, notre perception des choses dans l’environnement répond à la perception par l’environnementde notre soi. Cependant, je soutiens au contraire que ces deux mouvements d’inspiration et d’expiration ne sont pas le contraire exact l’un de l’autre. Comme le mouvement de la brasse en nataion, le premier est un mouvement de rassemblement et le second de propulsion. Nous inhalons l’atmosphère, mais nous exhalons selon les lignes du réseau. Bref, réseau et atmosphère sont deux côtés de la chair, et c’est dans leur alternance rythmique que nous trouvons la relation entre les lignes et le temps météorologique, qui est, comme je le soutiens, fondamental à la vie.L’atmosfera‘Atmosfera’ è una parola usata comunemente tanto da chi scrive di estetica come dai metereologi. Ciononostante, essi intendono con ciò delle cose piuttosto differenti, ognuno ritenendo che il proprio e il senso più fondamentale mentre l’altrui è meramente metaforico. Per chi si occupa di estetica, l’atmosfera reale è un’aura che emana dalle cose e affetta il nostro umore e le nostre motivazioni; per i metereologi è l’involucro gassoso che circonda il pianeta. Mostro come entrambi i sensi trascurano l’aria, o la riducono a un etere immateriale. Da una parte, per la scienza metereologica, è come se l’aria fosse stata portata al chiuso e presentata come una serie di effetti misurabili e calcolati. Dall’altra, l’estetica dell’affetto ha legato l’atmosfera alle forme solide degli artefatti e dei paesaggi.Nel reintrodurre l’ambiente aereo, intendo trovare un significato di atmosfera che trascenda l’opposizione tra i sensi affettivo e meteorologico. Faccio questo, seguendo Merleau-Ponty, trattando l’atmosfera come uno spazio di inalazione e esalazione. Come tale, corrisponde da vicino a ciò che Merleau-Ponty stesso chiama “la carne”. Ma questo concetto potrebbe anche essere tradotto come ‘reticolo’ (meshwork), riferendosi a quei grovigli di linee e percorsi lungo i quali ogni essere vivente è cucito al tessuto del mondo. Per Merleau-Ponty, il significato della carne risiede nella sua affermazione secondo la quale la percezione è fondamentalmente reversibile. Si può essere senzienti soltanto in un mondo senziente; quindi, ritiene il filosofo, la nostra percezione delle cose nell’ambienteè ricambiata dalla percezione che quest’ultimo ha di noi. Io mostro, al contrario, che questi due movimenti, corrispondenti all’inalazione e all’esalazione, non sono l’esatto rovescio l’uno dell’altro. Come nella bracciata a stile libero nel nuoto, il primo è un movimento di raccolta, il secondo un movimento di propulsione. Ovverossia, inaliamo l’atmosfera, ma esaliamo secondo le linee del reticolo. In breve, il reticolo e l’atmosfera sono due facce della carne, e troviamo nella loro alternanza ritmica la relazione tra le linee e il tempo che, come sostengo, è fondamentale alla vita. (shrink)

Cet article pointe vers les conséquences induites par l’usage d’artifices rhétoriques et l’abus du pouvoir du langage dans l’Église. Ce sont ceux-là même, les responsables d’institutions religieuses, qui censés défendre un service honnête de la Parole, qui souvent laissent se creuser un fossé entre paroles et actions. Une intention louable de servir de manière altruiste autrui est dans ce cas détourné vers des fins égoïstes : comme gagner davantage de notoriété et de moyens financiers ; assouvir un amour immodéré du (...) pouvoir. C’est moins à démasquer des « usurpasteurs » que nous invite l’auteur, mais bien à la relecture patiente des textes. Il n'y a rien de plus beau qu'une bible dont « les pages ont été cornées, marquées et dont la reliure fatiguée raconte l'assidue fréquentation de son propriétaire ». Chaque fois qu'une « bible se détruit par son utilisation, une femme, un homme se construit! ». (shrink)

Si sorvola spesso sull’“inter” dell’interazione, come se fosse solamente il punto di contatto tra due entità preesistenti, come ad esempio il mittente e il destinatario, o l’utente e il computer. Cosa significherebbe predere sul serio l’“inter” come un campo generativo, che è precondizione di questi punti terminali? Invece di essere concepito come un luogo su cui sorvolare, il presente saggio considera tale “inter” come un “essere tra” che può essere coltivato tramite tecniche di relazione. Il saggio prende in esame diversi (...) esempi di performance collaborativa, produzione d’immagine e creazione di ricerca, inclusi alcuni progetti collaborativi in cui l’autrice è stata coinvolta. Il saggio propone l’idea che le tecniche di relazione, le quali siano tanto rigorose quanto frutto di improvvisazione e attraverso le quali dei nuclei di intensità possano emergere tra tutti gli elementi, rendono all’“essere tra” quanto gli è dovuto. Consentendo a tale relazionalità collaborativa di lunga durata di emergere, l’“essere tra” apre anche nuove modalità espressive per le pratiche artistiche. (shrink)