Este artículo se propone interrogar la relación entre sufrimiento y atención desde una perspectiva fenomenológica. A partir de este análisis intentaremos clarificar el fenómeno del sufrimiento mismo. Un fenómeno singular que ocurre de acuerdo a una saturación particular como un acontecimiento personal y dramático, y que puede ser experienciado en tanto que se impone irreversible e irrevocable. Así, cada una de estas notas constitutivas del sufrimiento revelarán la transformación y transmutación que este producen despliegue de nuestra atención, afectando la propia (...) relación con nosotros mismos, con los otros y con el mundo. Este camino interrogativo toma su impulso desde las caracterizaciones ricoeurianas del sufrimiento, entendido por el filósofo francés como la forma más vivas de consciencia de sí. (shrink)

Sensibility has traditionally been defined as a relation with the world’s exteriority. However, a certain post-husserlian phenomenology tends to reverse this definition and to redefine sensibility as an internal relation that takes place from within the world. This article focuses on this phenomenological concept of “sensibility” in Levinas and Merleau-Ponty and intends to show that this concept rests upon the presupposition of an alternative according to which we would have whether a sensible experience of identity, or an acosmic experience of (...) otherness—whether a wordly experience of the same or a worldless experience of otherness. Yet, by reducing sensibility to the experience of the world’s interiority and rejecting otherness beyond any worldly experience, this conception fails to account for a significant dimension of sensibility—namely, sensibility as the experience of the world’s own otherness, foreignness or exteriority. It is our hope that, from the critical exposition of this alternative, will eventually appear in conclusion the significant part of this forgotten dimension of sensibility. (shrink)

The phenomenological tradition is commonly understood as the domain of “philosophy of the subject”, and in this regard it is often criticized in contemporary thought. In respect to it, the originality of Michel Henry is to enter into this tradition by formulating to it an inverse objection: a mistake of the “historic” phenomenology is that it has not been able to conceive the subject in its own being or better, in its “interiority”. The aim of this paper is to determine (...) the meaning and scope of such criticism, the development of its consequences, not only regarding the positive concept of subjectivity but also in the sense of opening its possibilities to renew the understanding of artistic phenomenon. (shrink)

O objetivo do artigo consiste em analisar, a partir dos parágrafos 34 a 38 da obra Kant e o problema da metafísica e segundo a exegese heideggeriana, o sentido e pertinência da inserção da problemática antropológica anteposta às três questões fundamentais expostas na Crítica da razão pura. Heidegger converte um rol exaustivo, delimitado pelas três perguntas, em um rol exemplificado, ao colocar a indagação da antropologia filosófica como pressuposto e consequência necessária das três interrogações kantianas. Heidegger recorre ao conceito de (...) finitude, para validar a importância e para fundamentar a primazia da questão antropológica sobre as demais: a interrogação “que é o homem” transforma-se na primeira que dispensa, a partir de si, as três restantes. Na finitude estão circunscritas as discussões sobre o tempo, a autoafecção pura, a imaginação e o tempo originário. É na finitude que estão os verdadeiros sinais ou ecos da antropologia filosófica kantiana. (shrink)

What makes it possible to affect one another, to move and be moved by another person? Why do some of our encounters transform us? The experience of moving one another points to the inter-affective in intersubjectivity. Inter-affection is hard to account for under a cognitivist banner, and has not received much attention in embodied work on intersubjectivity. I propose that understanding inter-affection needs a combination of insights into self-affection, embodiment, and interaction processes. I start from Michel Henry's radically immanent idea (...) of self-affection, and bring it into a contrastive dialogue with the enactive concepts of autonomy and (participatory) sense-making. I suggest that the latter ideas can open up Henry's idea of self-affection to inter-affection (something he aimed to do, but did not quite manage) and that, in turn, Henry's work can provide insights into underexplored elements of intersubjectivity, such as its ineffable and mysterious aspects, and erotic encounters. (shrink)