• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
#Aula ppe 2012.1     racionalidade monologica monológica cartesiana
 

#Aula ppe 2012.1 racionalidade monologica monológica cartesiana

on

  • 303 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
303
Views on SlideShare
303
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
2
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    #Aula ppe 2012.1     racionalidade monologica monológica cartesiana #Aula ppe 2012.1 racionalidade monologica monológica cartesiana Presentation Transcript

    • AULA PPE 2011.1 A
    • RACIONALIDADEMONOLÓGICA CARTESIANA AS ORIGENS DA RACIONALIDADE QUE SUBJAZ AO PLANEJAMENTO TÉCNICO
    • PROMETHEUS PERPLEXED GELLNER, ERNEST, “Prometheus Perplexed” ” in JARVIE, Ian & LAOR, N. (eds.), Critical Rationalism, the Social Sciences and the Humanities. Essays/or Joseph Agassi, Vol. II, 3-18. © 1995 Kluwer Academic Publishers
    • CARTESIAN RATIONALISM AND AUTONOMY “One of the central theme, perhaps indeed the central obsession, of Cartesian rationalism is the aspiration for autonomy […]. [GELLNER,1999:3]
    • CARTESIAN RATIONALISM“Man makes himself, and he does so rationally. [GELLNER,1999:3]
    • CARTESIAN RATIONALISM Cultural accumulation is irrational: it is a blind process […]  [GELLNER,1999:3]
    • CARTESIAN RATIONALISM What you have not made and tested yourself, you cannot trust. [GELLNER,1999:3]
    • CARTESIAN RATIONALISM The unexamined inheritance of mere custom and example, of the jetsam of history, of the bank of custom of a culture, can never satisfy the stringent rationalist criteria.. [GELLNER,1999:3]
    • CARTESIAN RATIONALISM Autonomy requires reason, and reason requires autonomy. [GELLNER,1999:3]
    • PROMETHEAN ASPIRATION AND THE COSMIC EXILE
    • PROMETHEAN ASPIRATION AS AN COSMIC EXILE “To what extent can this Promethean aspiration to autarchy and self-creation be satisfied ? The answer is simple. It cannot. [GELLNER, 1999:5]
    • PROMETHEAN ASPIRATION AS AN EXILE COSMIC !We cannot, as Descartes in effect planned and desired, excogitate ourselves ex nihilo. We cannot think up, from the recesses of our private consciousness, both the criteria and the tools required for the erection of a new conceptual and cognitive edifice, destined no longer to be a beholden to any prior history. [GELLNER, 1999:5]
    • COSMIC EXILE vs. PROVIDENTIALISTS Such an aspiration towards such a “cosmic exile” is pervasive in the history of modern Western thought. [GELLNER,1999:3] [GELLNER, 1999:5]
    • COSMIC EXILE the mith of a new king of culture The Cosmic Exile the opting out of culture, is impracticable. But it constitutes the noble and wholly appropriate charter or myth of a new kind of culture, a new system of a distinctively Cartesian kind of Custom and Example. Custom was not transcended: but a new kind of custom altogether was initiated. [GELLNER, 1999:5]
    • COSMIC EXILEinitiated and made possible na age totally unprecendent “The separation of referential cognition from other activities, the systematic submission of cognitive claim to a severely extra-social centralized court of appeal, (under the slogan of “clear and distinct ideas,’ or of “experience”) and the establishment of a single currency of reference, had burst open the limits of knowledge. It initiated and made possible an age of totally unprecedent, fabulous cognitive and economic growth. Through its associated technology, it brought the Malthusian age to an end. Henceforth resources would, and generally did, grow faster than population. [GELLNER, 1999:5]
    • COSMIC EXILEinitiated and made possible na age totally unprecendent Through its associated technology, it brought the Malthusian age to an end. Henceforth resources would, and generally did, grow faster than population. [GELLNER, 1999:5]
    • DESCARTES Descartes was wrong in supposing that he could liberate himself from culture, from custom and example. The truth of the matter is that what was emerging was a radically different new kind of culture, a new custom which he helped codify. But it was not simply one further culture amongst others. It was new king, and was built on wholly new principles. All the same , it was a culture, rather than a transcendence of all culture, as Descartes had supposed. [GELLNER, 1999:6]
    • DESCARTES A new king of society had engendered a new species of compulsion It had its own and distinctive compulsions, and they too had their social roots, as Weber taught. A new king of society had engendered a new species of compulsion, and it was in turn sustained by them [...] under the guise of an account of the human mind a such, they give us a portrait, from the inside, of the unique new kind of Custom and Example. [GELLNER, 1999:6]
    • DESCARTESThe practice of scrutiny-by-doubt as an means of conceptual purification The practice of scrutiny-by-doubt, which Descartes proposed as a means of conceptual purification, is in fact an excellent customs procedure for vetting what could, and what could not be granted an entry point into the new culture […][GELLNER, 1999:6] The logical compulsion which owes nothing to culture, and which can consequently give us a vision of nature valid for all cultures and rooted in none, are in the end quite simple: the givenness of data, (present in Descartes´ thought as the immediate availability of the thinking substance to itself), plus the simple logical principle that no generalisation incompatible with data may be accepted. [GELLNER, 1999:6/7]
    • DESCARTESa vision of nature valid for all cultures and rooted in none The logical compulsion which owes nothing to culture, and which can consequently give us a vision of nature valid for all cultures and rooted in none, are in the end quite simple: the givenness of data, (present in Descartes´ thought as the immediate availability of the thinking substance to itself), plus the simple logical principle that no generalisation incompatible with data may be accepted. [GELLNER, 1999:6/7]
    • DESCARTES The Crusoe Style of Cognition “So the heroic erection of an entire world by a single individual, the Crusoe style of cognition, the use of naught but his own and self-tested and self-produced resources, is indeed impossible. [GELLNER, 1999:7]
    • CRUSOE/DESCARTES new man vs. new world “How did we build this new world ? It was built up by new men imbued by the Crusoe/Descartes spirit. Robinson Crusoe was a man who carried the essential part of his culture in himself and could re-erect it on the island on his own. He needs no complementary fellow-specialists, whose zone of competence he is ritually or legally barred from entering. In other words, all the specialism of his culture employ the same idiom, which he has mastered, and they are open to him. [GELLNER, 1999:7]
    • DESCARTESnew king of culture, a new king of epistemic constitution “But the almost-as-heroic establishment of a new king of culture, endowed with a new king of epistemic constitution, was possible, and it did take place. We were bound to fail, but we were also bound to try; and the effort bore magnificent fruit, even if it was not all that the founder Rationalist had proposed.. [GELLNER, 1999:7]
    • DESCARTESThe abortive effort defined a new civilization [GELLNER, 1999:7]
    • DESCARTES/CRUSOE A RADICALLY NEW SOCIAL ORDER
    • A RADICALLY NEW SOCIAL ORDER “But to say this is not to reduce the philosophical content of individualist rationalism to its social role. GELLNER, 1999:7]
    • DESCARTESthe manner in which the new social order works This is not a sociologically reductionist position. The philosophical content genuinely illuminates the manner in which the new social order works: it really is individualist, and it is based on genuine and cumulative knowledge. [GELLNER, 1999:7]
    • DESCARTES AND THERATIONALISTS CONTRADICTION “ […] the wants to produce knowledge from his own resources, and he also wants it to refer to something objective. [GELLNER, 1999:8]
    • RATONALISMcognitive self-made man vs.pursuit of transcendence “A conspicuous feature of Rationalism was its aspiration for cognitive self-reaction: the rationalist desires to be a totally self- made-man […]. […] The second closely related and equally important, trait is the pursuit of transcendence. [GELLNER, 1999:8]
    • RATONALISMcognitive self-made man vs.pursuit of transcendence Rationalism unquestionably conceives knowledge as the attainment of something external and independent: it must not be merely something which is, so to speak, internally spawned by the organism. This would seem to constitute a contradiction: the rationalist wants to produce knowledge from his own resources, and he also wants it to refer to something objective. But it is not. [GELLNER,
    • AUTONOMY VS. TRANSCEDENCE “[…] So there is a kind of paradox: the citizen of a rational order claims autonomy precisely because the contents of his knowledge, the cognitive claims he makes, are totally independent of him. He did not make it up: he found it. You might have expected the opposite. You might have expected the autonomous agent to create this object. Not so. But the paradox is only apparent. [GELLNER, 1999:8]
    • AUTONOMY VS. TRANSCEDENCE a kind of paradox “[…] So there is a kind of paradox: the citizen of a rational order claims autonomy precisely because the contents of his knowledge, the cognitive claims he makes, are totally independent of him. He did not make it up: he found it. You might have expected the opposite. You might have expected the autonomous agent to create this object. Not so. But the paradox is only apparent. [GELLNER, 1999:8]
    • CARTESIAN/EMPRICIST METHOD “They observe the rules of what may be called Cartesian/empiricist method: separation of all questions and issues and, second, the subjection of all claims to tests of all questions and issues and, second, the subjection of all claims to tests not under their own control. This, in conjunction with the strong implusion to generality and order, seems to have engendered a form of knowledge of astonishing power, and one not linked to any cultural system. [GELLNER, 1999, 8/9]
    • CARTESIAN/EMPIRICIST METHOD It appears that if the world is to be knowable at all, it will yield to this strategy alone. That it is knowable at all, that it does surrender its secrets to such a strategy, if to no other, is a miracle. The question concerning why it should be such a world cannot be answered by the deployment of that strategy itself. As there is no other method, it must remain a secret for us. [GELLNER, 1999, 8/9]
    • KARL MARX, HOLY GHOST ANDPROVIDENTIALISM
    • COSMIC EXILE vs. PROVIDENTIALISTS “The Providentialists try to provide an alternative to Cosmic Exile […] [GELLNER, 1999:5]
    • KARL MARX AND HOLY GHOST An Providentialists “Marx was one of the many Providentialists: he could deride the aspiration to stand outside society and to tell it where to go. He could do so because he believed that he had access to knowledge concerning where it must go .. [GELLNER, 1999:4]
    • KARL MARX AND HOLY GHOST An Providentialists “We could trust the World-Process, … we can trust “revolutionising practice” , his version of the Holy Ghost. [GELLNER, 1999:4]