Na primeira analogia da experiência, o locus classicus da sua teoria da substancialidade, Kant introduz a substância como algo que permanece através do tempo, como para compensar a alteração dos estados de consciência. O conflito de interpretações a propósito desta questão é provocado sobretudo pela questão de saber até que ponto Kant identifica este substrato permanente de todas as manifestações com a matéria no sentido físico do termo. Nesse sentido, o autor do presente artigo desenvolve um argumento em ordem a (...) mostrar que, segundo Kant, apenas os objectos materials que ocupam espaço podem possuir o estatuto de substância (enquanto fenómeno). Para além disso, no entanto, mostra-se também que o critério da permanência temporal não exaure o conceito de substância. Com efeito, o artigo demonstra até que ponto Kant suplementa a noção de permanência mediante a sua compreensão da substância como sujeito de causalidade e de acção. Esta concepção está presente não apenas na sua metafísica da natureza, mas estende-se também à nossa própria auto-compreensão enquanto seres vivos capazes de agir em liberdade. /// In the first analogy of experience, the locus classicus for his theory of substantiality, Kant introduces substance as something that endures through time, as though to compensate for changing states of consciousness. The conflict of interpretations concerning this issue is provoked above all by the question as to whether Kant identifies this permanent substrate of all appearances with physical matter. This article argues that, according to Kant, only material objects that occupy space can possess the status of substance (as phenomenon). However, it also contends that the criterion of temporal permanence does not exhaust the concept of substance. Kant supplements permanence by means of his understanding of substance as the subject of causality and action. This conception is not only echoed in his metaphysics of nature, but extends to our selfunderstanding as living and freely acting beings. (shrink)

Partindo do questionamento acerca daorigem da confiança de Agostinho na objetivida-de inerente à subjetividade humana, ligada essen-cialmente à pergunta pela verdade, o autor desen-volve o modo como Agostinho realiza a passagemdo não-eu para 0 eu, enfocando a investigação deAgostinho sobre a liberdade do ser humano e so-bre a perda da liberdade, bem como o modo comoo ser humano experimenta o desejo, a desordeme a violência do seu próprio eu, podendo perdê-lo.

« Il l’appela Utopie, mot grec qui veut dire un tel lieu n’existe pas 2. »Ne vivons nous pas dans des non-lieux, sans repère où le temps qui nous reste est à la démesure des changements et des catastrophes inévitables ?Chacun dans le repli sur soi, dans l’imprévisible..

Le naos de Dionysos Eleuthereus, croisé par Pausanias sur la route menant du Dipylon à l’Académie, n’a jamais pu être décrit faute de découverte qui pourrait lui être associée de manière sûre. Sa localisation varie selon les auteurs, qui le situent à différents endroits et de manière plus ou moins vague, sans qu’aucun argument soit déterminant. Il est cependant possible de resserrer les limites de l’espace d’investigation par une analyse attentive du passage du Périégète qui concerne cette région. L’auteur ne (...) suit vraisemblablement pas un ordre topographique strict, mais structure sa description en deux volets et parcourt le même espace deux fois selon des thèmes différents : d’abord les sanctuaires, puis les tombeaux. L’autre sanctuaire mentionné par Pausanias dans la région, celui des Artémis Aristè et Kallistè, peut fonctionner ici comme une balise spatiale et narrative. Or sa localisation, si elle n’a guère été discutée depuis près d’un siècle, est assez sûre. (shrink)

Le naos de Dionysos Eleuthereus, croisé par Pausanias sur la route menant du Dipylon à l’Académie, n’a jamais pu être décrit faute de découverte qui pourrait lui être associée de manière sûre. Sa localisation varie selon les auteurs, qui le situent à différents endroits et de manière plus ou moins vague, sans qu’aucun argument soit déterminant. Il est cependant possible de resserrer les limites de l’espace d’investigation par une analyse attentive du passage du Périégète qui concerne cette région. L’auteur ne (...) suit vraisemblablement pas un ordre topographique strict, mais structure sa description en deux volets et parcourt le même espace deux fois selon des thèmes différents : d’abord les sanctuaires, puis les tombeaux. L’autre sanctuaire mentionné par Pausanias dans la région, celui des Artémis Aristè et Kallistè, peut fonctionner ici comme une balise spatiale et narrative. Or sa localisation, si elle n’a guère été discutée depuis près d’un siècle, est assez sûre. (shrink)

“Todo o poder emana do povo...” “ Todos são iguais perante a lei...” (BRASIL, 1988) Estes pequenos trechos, respectivamente do Parágrafo Único do Artigo 1º e do Artigo 5º da constituição brasileira de 1988 não foram redigidos por acaso, ou porque os legisladores assim quiseram, pois acharam que soaria bem; e nem porque de fato acreditavam nisso, mesmo enquanto representantes escolhidos pelo povo, quando de sua promulgação. O Brasil como membro fundador da Organização das Nações Unidas, incorporou em sua constituição (...) diversos pontos da Declaração Universal dos Direitos Humanos (ORGANIZAÇÃO DAS NAÇÕES UNIDAS (UN), 1948). Em 1992, o Brasil se torna signatário da Convenção Americana Sobre Direitos Humanos (ORGANIZAÇÃO DOS ESTADOS AMERICANOS (OAS), 1969), (também conhecido como Pacto de San José da Costa Rica) que existia desde 1969, e que provavelmente não fora ratificado antes devido ao, vamos chamar assim, Estado de Exceção (1964 a 1985). A teoria é que estes tratados permitam uma maior igualdade entre as pessoas, se agreguem à política e às agendas de seus países signatários, e de alguma forma, tenham valor de lei ou ao menos de referência em questões legais. Em última instância, se alguma lei local não tiver como decidir por algo, recorre-se aos tratados internacionais. A ideia por trás deste artigo é analisar o viés individualista destas cartas, remetendo sua origem a Hobbes e Rousseau, mostrando a manutenção da desigualdade entre os homens. Vale ressaltar, no entanto, que seus artigos – são 30 no da ONU, e 82 no da OEA - transpassam, perpassam e unem diversas obras, de forma que fica impossível tratar de apenas um autor ou obra específica nos trechos analisados. (shrink)

la82 12.00 Normal 0 21 false false false PT-BR X-NONE X-NONE MicrosoftInternetExplorer4 /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Tabela normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; mso-para-margin-top:0cm; mso-para-margin-right:0cm; mso-para-margin-bottom:10.0pt; mso-para-margin-left:0cm; line-height:115%; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-language:EN-US;} Este artigo mostra que o princípio primário da ciência do ente enquanto ente, apresentado e defendido por Aristóteles no Livro IV da Metafísica , é constituído pela bi-implicaçáo necessária (modal) entre os princípios de náo-contradiçáo e do terceiro excluído, (...) e náo somente, como na interpretaçáo tradicional, pelo primeiro destes princípios. Tal é mostrado através de uma interpretaçáo de uma parte do capítulo 3 e, em especial, de três partes do capítulo 4 deste escrito, onde Aristóteles desenvolve o que chamou "demonstraçáo refutativa", que consiste na demonstraçáo indireta do princípio primário por meio da refutaçáo da tese que nega (de modo forte) este mesmo princípio. A interpretaçáo apresentada no artigo mostra que neste procedimento lógico Aristóteles está defendendo tanto o princípio de náo-contradiçáo quanto o princípio do terceiro excluído, assumindo ambos como formulações equivalentes do princípio primário da ciência do ser enquanto ser.  . (shrink)

Entre os muitos textos em que Leibniz introduz e apresenta o princípio de razão suficiente está, como se sabe, o do parágrafo 7 dos Princípios da Natureza e da Graça. O texto diz: "Jusqu'icy nous n'avons parlé qu'en simples Physiciens : maintenant il faut s'elever à la Metaphysique, en nous servant du Grand Principe, peu employé communement, qui porte que rien ne se fait sans raison suffisante, c'est à dire que rien n'arrive, sans qu'il soit possible à celuy qui connoitroit (...) assés les choses, de rendre une Raison qui suffise pour determiner, pourquoy il en est ainsi, et non pas autrement. Ce principe posé, la premiere question qu'on a droit de faire, sera, Pourquoy il y a plustôt quelque chose que rien? Car le rien est plus simple et plus facile que quelque chose. De plus, supposé que des choses doivent exister, il faut qu'on puisse rendre raison, pourquoy elles doivent exister ainsi, et non autrement". O texto é evidentemente muito denso e inclui uma enorme multiplicidade de aspectos que deveriam ser analisados, por exemplo, o pouco uso que se faz de um princípio que, todavia, está sempre presente em tudo o que pensamos e fazemos; o facto de ter de haver uma razão para haver algo e para haver o que há; o facto de o nada ser mais fácil do que o ente; que se entende, afinal, por razão, que é que queremos dizer quando dizemos que há razão para qualquer coisa; que é que a noção de suficiência acrescenta à noção de razão, etc. O problema é, aliás, bem actual. D. Parfit, em On What Matters, escreve logo na primeira página do primeiro capítulo: "It is hard to explain the concept of reason, or what the phrase 'a reason' means. Facts give us reasons, we might say, when they count in favour of our having some attitude, or our acting in some way. But 'counts in favour of' means roughly 'gives a reason for'. Like some other fundamental concepts, the concept of a reason is indefinable in the sense that it cannot be helpfully explained merely by using words". Ou seja, não é claro a que é que corresponde a noção de razão, e apesar de Parfit ignorar tranquilamente o que a tradição pensou sobre o assunto, pode valer a pena regressar a Leibniz, também porque Leibniz se vangloria com frequência de dizer que o princípio de razão suficiente é o seu princípio. (shrink)

la82 12.00 Normal 0 21 false false false PT-BR X-NONE X-NONE MicrosoftInternetExplorer4 /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Tabela normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; mso-para-margin-top:0cm; mso-para-margin-right:0cm; mso-para-margin-bottom:10.0pt; mso-para-margin-left:0cm; line-height:115%; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-language:EN-US;} Quando o pensamento se volta para a subjetividade, a linguagem está ausente. E quando a linguagem é questáo, a subjetividade fica de fora, como mostrou Foucault em As Palavras e as Coisas . Seráo elas mutuamente excludentes? Desde fins (...) do século XIX a linguagem tem sido abordada pela lógica, pela lingüística, pela filosofia analítica. Pensar só é possível se houver uma estrutura semântica, segundo Frege e Wittgenstein. Dá-se a virada lingüística. Porém esse modelo náo dá conta da fala, do contexto, limita-se à sentença proposicional. Após a virada pragmática, subjetividade e linguagem se relacionam num outro nível, a questáo passa a ser a intersubjetividade, e nesse sentido, sujeito e linguagem náo se excluem. É o que se pode depreender da concepçáo de jogos de linguagem de Wittgenstein, de racionalidade comunicativa de Habermas e de crítica à representaçáo de Rorty, através de suas respectivas noções de formas de vida, entendimento comunicativo e uso de discursos. O sujeito é constituído pela açáo e pela fala. (shrink)

Nous prendrons pour point de départ la célèbre distinction de Winnicott entre un vrai soi et un faux soi ou, en d'autres termes, empruntés à la phénoménologie, entre un soi authentique et un soi inauthentique . Mais le soi est une notion qui ne va pas sans soulever bien des difficultés, y compris aux yeux des spécialistes de l'œuvre de Winnicott, ne serait-ce que dans son rapport au moi. Il nous semble cependant possible d'élucider certaines d'entre elles grâce à l'élaboration (...) par la phénoménologie heideggérienne puis sartrienne des concepts de soi, d'authenticité et d'inauthenticité. En effet, pour Heidegger, le Dasein ne saurait être un moi au sens d'un ego substantiel mais le Dasein est un soi , un être dont le mode d'être est irréductible à celui d'un objet subsistant et qui peut se "choisir" lui-même, se gagner ou bien se perdre . De ce point de vue, l'authenticité est tout d'abord une manière possible d'exister, et si le Dasein peut être soi sur le mode de l'authenticité, il peut l'être également sur le mode privatif de la fuite et de l'inauthenticité. Reprenant le concept heideggérien d'authenticité, Sartre l'enrichit, nous semble-t-il, en insistant sur l'impossibilité pour l'existant d'être ce qu'il est. Ainsi, contrairement au soi inauthentique qui ne cesse de se fuir dans ce qu'on peut appeler un faux soi, le soi authentique ou vrai soi assume son existence et, par conséquent, aussi bien la contingence de son être que sa liberté. Nous essayerons ainsi de montrer qu'il est possible de reprendre et d'approfondir phénoménologiquement la conception winnicottienne du vrai et du faux soi.Partiremos da célebre distinção de Winnicott entre um verdadeiro si-mesmo e um falso si-mesmo ou, em outros termos, emprestados da fenomenologia, entre um si-mesmo autêntico e um si-mesmo inautêntico . Todavia, o si-mesmo é uma noção que levanta muitas dificuldades, também para os especialistas da obra de Winnicott, mesmo que seja somente em sua relação com eu [moi]. Parece-nos possível, entretanto, elucidar algumas dentre essas noções por meio da elaboração da fenomenologia heideggeriana e, em seguida, por meio da sartriana, dos conceitos de si mesmo, de autenticidade e de inautenticidade. Com efeito, para Heidegger, o Dasein não seria um ser, um eu , no sentido de um ego substancial, mas o Dasein é um si-mesmo , um ser cujo modo de ser é irredutível àquele de um objeto subsistente e que pode "escolher" a si mesmo, se ganhar ou mesmo se perder . Desse ponto de vista, a autenticidade é, primeiramente, uma maneira possível de existir, e se o Dasein pode ser si mesmo no modo da autenticidade, ele o pode ser igualmente no modo privativo da fuga e da inautenticidade. Retomando o conceito heideggeriano de autenticidade, Sartre o enriquece, parece-nos, insistindo sobre a impossibilidade para o existente de ser isto que ele é. Assim, contrariamente ao si-mesmo inautêntico que não cessa de fugir para isto que poder-se-ia chamar de falso si-mesmo, o si-mesmo autêntico ou verdadeiro si-mesmo assume sua existência e, por consequência, tanto a contingência de seu ser como sua liberdade. Desse modo, nós tentaremos mostrar que é possível retomar e aprofundar fenomenologicamente a concepção winnicottiana de verdadeiro e falso si-mesmo.We begin with Winnicott's well-known distinction between a true and a false self, or, in terms borrowed from phenomenology, between an authentic and an unauthentic self. Self, however, is a notion that raises many difficulties also for Winnicott scholars, even if only in its relation with the I [me]. Yet it seems possible to elucidate some of those notions by way of a Heideggerian phenomenology followed by a Sartrean phenomenology of the concepts of self, authenticity and unauthenticity. In fact, for Heidegger the Dasein is not a being, an I , in the sense of a substantial ego, but rather a self , a being whose mode of being is irreducible to that of a subsisting object and that can "choose" itself, gain itself , and even loose itself . From this point of view, authenticity is above all a possible mode of existing, and if the Dasein can be itself in the authentic way, it can likewise be in the deprived mode of fleeing and of unauthenticity. Returning to the Heideggerian concept of authenticity, Sartre enriches – it seem to us – by underlining the impossibility for the existent of being what it is. Thus, unlike the unauthentic self that cannot but flee towards that which we might call a false self, the authentic or true self takes on its existence, and therefore also takes on both the contingency of its being and its freedom. Hence, we will try to show that it is possible phenomenologically to resume and go deeper into the Winnicottian conception of the true and false self. (shrink)

Normal 0 21 false false false PT-BR X-NONE X-NONE MicrosoftInternetExplorer4 /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Tabela normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; mso-para-margin-top:0cm; mso-para-margin-right:0cm; mso-para-margin-bottom:10.0pt; mso-para-margin-left:0cm; line-height:115%; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-language:EN-US;} O propósito do presente texto é trazer à luz breves considerações acerca do formar como “fazer” que, enquanto faz, inventa o “modo de fazê-lo”: uma perspectiva estética em Luigi Pareyson, para quem, “produçáo é ao mesmo tempo e indivisivelmente, invençáo”. A (...) interpretaçáo pessoal é o tornar evidente a própria obra, isto é, o dar-se, revelar-se, o descortinar-se da obra em si. O interpretar é de acordo com Pareyson, em si, sempre pessoal; entretanto é apenas uma forma dentre tantas outras possíveis. A pluralidade das interpretações náo deve ser considerada uma desvantagem, longe de ser um “defeito” é já uma revelaçáo da inexorabilidade do pensamento humano. Ao conceber a interpretaçáo como singular, evidencia-se a historicidade do contexto e a personalidade do pensante. Iniciaremos com algumas considerações acerca da estética, em seguida, trataremos da forma como execuçáo e o formar como experimento. Palavras-chave : Estética; Formatividade; Interpretaçáo; Luigi Pareyson; Obra de arte. (shrink)

Resumo: O corpo está por toda parte: ele é aquele que «está irreparavelmente aqui» onde estou, eu que não «posso me deslocar sem ele», já disse o filósofo. Talvez por isso mesmo seja tão antigo e tão insistente o movimento que, multiplicando as metáforas para dizer sua presença, visa de fato a maior parte do tempo seu ocultamento. Assim, se é possível falar aqui de uma cartografia, ela sem dúvida designará o intenso movimento filosófico de ocultamento do corpo, que paradoxalmente (...) dá a ver o que tanto se buscou evitar: é que o corpo sempre resiste, insistindo em se fazer disponível aos «mundos múltiplos e divergentes» que a cada vez a arte aproxima. Palavras-chave: Corpo. Movimento. Formação humana. Cartography of the body and unmanageability: The body is everywhere: he is «is irreparably here» where I am, for «I cannot move without him», as the philosopher said. Perhaps it is why this ancient and persistent movement that multiplies the metaphors to tell its presence seeks in fact its concealment most of the time. Thus, if it is possible to speak about a cartography, it will undoubtedly designate the intense philosophical movement of body concealment, which paradoxically hints at what it has sought so much to avoid: is that the body always resists, insisting on making itself available to « multiple and divergent worlds» which art approaches each time. Keywords: Body. Mouvement. Human Formation. Cartographies du corps et de l’ingovernabilité Résumé: Le corps est partout: « il est ici irréparablement» où je suis, car «je ne peux pas me déplacer sans lui», comme le philosophe l’a dit. Et c’est peut-être là la raison par laquelle, à force de multiplier les métaphores pour signaler as présence, ce que lui vise, finalement, la plupart du temps est bien son effacement. Ainsi, s’il nous est permis de parler de cartographie, elle devra sans doute désigner cet intense mouvement philosophique d’oubli du corps, qui finalement révèle ce qui l’on a tellement voulu éviter : car le corps résiste, à chaque fois, et qu’il insiste de se faire disponible aux «mondes multiples et divergents» que, à chaque fois, l’art rend présent. Mots-clés: Corps. Mouvement. Formation humaine. (shrink)

Resumo. Hannah Arendt. Educação inicial. Agostinho de Hipona. Este artigo faz parte de uma investigação em andamento, na qual exploramos a leitura de arendtiana do Agostinho de Hipona, partindo da obra inicial, El concepto de amor en San Agustín (2001). Consideramos que a investigação da dissertação doutoral, obra tão pouco explorada pelos seus mais relevantes interpretes, pode brindarmos novas chaves de leitura da teoria política de Hannah Arendt, tornando mais complexo nossa abordagem na sua leitura heterodoxa da tradição do pensamento (...) filosófico. Segundo nossa hipótese é a tese doutoral de 1929, onde a dimensão política do problema num sentido amplo começa a emergir, a partir da questão do que é especificamente humano, sempre sujeito à constante tensão entre um “não mais” e um “ainda não” (Arendt, 2001: 311; Agustín, 2005: XI, 21,27). Somente em posteriores trabalhos a leitura da fonte agostiniana –focada cada vez mais nas Confesiones (2005) y na Ciudad de Dios (1958) fica articulada explicitamente com a elaboração da trama mais conhecida da fenomenologia da ação política; na qual numerosos e importantes interpretes tenham situado o giro embora da política da aluna do Heidegger e Jaspers (Young Bruehl, 2006; Canovan, 2002; Benhabib, 2000; Forti, 2001). Embora essas autoras reconheçam a formação inicial e sua influencia sobre a filósofa Arendt, em geral, todas elas acentuam a ruptura com todo o seu escopo de formação universitária em filosofia e teologia. (shrink)

Résumé: Cet article vise à analyser la réception de la théorie cartésienne des vérités éternelles dans les œuvres de Leibniz et Malebranche. Les deux auteurs ont critiqué et refusé ses prémisses pour éviter les conséquences dont ils pensaient qu’elles découlaient de la doctrine de Descartes. L’objectif est celui de démontrer qu’on ne peut pas comprendre pleinement leurs réflexions sans les interpréter à la lumière de la théorie cartésienne, dans la mesure où elle représente la condition critique de possibilité de leur (...) approche philosophique. Mots-clés: Théodicée Moderne. Vérités Éternelles. Descartes. Leibniz. Malebranche. Descartes and the genealogy of modern theodicy in Leibniz and Malebranche: This article aims to analyze the reception of the Cartesian theory of the eternal truths in the works of Leibniz and Malebranche. Both authors criticized and refused the premises of Descartes’ doctrine in order to avoid the consequences they believed derived from it. The main goal is to demonstrate that we cannot fully understand their reflections without interpreting them in the light of the Cartesian theory, as it represents the critical condition of possibility of their philosophical approach. Key-words: Modern Theodicy. Eternal Truths. Descartes. Leibniz. Malebranche. Descartes e a genealogia da teodiceia moderna em Leibniz e Malebranche Resumo: Este artigo propõe-se a analisar a recepção da teoria de Descartes das verdades eternas nas obras de Leibniz e Malebranche. Os dois autores criticaram e recusaram as premissas cartesianas para evitar as consequências que eles pensavam dependentes da doutrina. O objetivo é demonstrar que não podemos compreender plenamente as reflexões de Leibniz e Malebranche sem interpretá-las à luz da teoria cartesiana, como se essa doutrina representasse a condição crítica de possibilidade da sua abordagem filosófica. Palavras-chave: Teodiceia Moderna. Verdades Eternas. Descartes. Leibniz. Malebranche. (shrink)

L'Action de Blondel, malgré son centenaire, n'est pas encore un texte très connu. Sa rigueur philosophique a souftert de nombreuses incompréhensions, dûes à des lectures partiales. L'intelligence philosophique tente cependant. aujoud'hui comme hier, de méditer sur le sens de l'existence et sur ce qui uniile nos vies sans les étouffer sous des formes uniformisantes. Cet article montre comment Blondel entreprend une telle méditation, en assumant la structure essentielle du "symbole". /// L'Action de Blondel, apesar do seu centenário, ainda não é (...) urn texto muito conhecido. O seu rigor filosófico sofreu numerosas incompreensões, devidas a leituras parciais. A inteligência filosófica tenta, contudo, hoje como ontem, meditar sobre o sentido da existência e sobre o que unifica as nossas vidas sem as sufocar sob formas uniformizantes. Este artigo mostra como Blondel empreende uma tal meditação, tirando dela a estrutura essencial do "símbolo". Despite the fact that it is a centenary work, Blondel's L'Action is not yet very well known. Its philosophical accuracy was misundestood through partial readings. However, now as before, philosophical intelligence attempts to meditate on the meaning of human existence, on what unifies our lives without suffocating them through uniforming forms. This paper shows how Blondel undertakes such a meditation, assuming the essential structure of "symbol". (shrink)

Considerações sobre a impossibilidade de definir o homem a partir de Descartes Procuramos, neste texto, pensar o significado da rejeição da tradicional definição de homem efetuada por Descartes, quando tenta entender o que somos. Essa rejeição é resultado de um novo método de filosofar, que poderíamos designar como via das ideias – aquela que parte das forças do próprio espírito para examinar tudo o que ocorre nele e em qualquer outra coisa, evitando usar de pressuposições. A fim de marcar essa (...) diferença de perspectiva e a reiterada disposição do filósofo francês em elaborá-la, apontamos a limitação da noção de conceito – seja aquela da tradição aristotélica-escolástica, seja a pós-cartesiana, fortemente marcada pela representação científica – para dar conta da problemática do fenômeno humano. Nesse sentido, insistimos na riqueza e amplitude da noção de ideia – elaborada e reelaborada ao longo dos anos pelo filósofo – para enfrentar esse complexo fenômeno. Uma vez que o homem não é uma substância, a manifestação dos seus aspectos é sempre adjetiva, podendo qualificá-lo sem, contudo, propiciar a sua compreensão. Essa dificuldade de apreensão exige, portanto, que o estudo da ideia de homem explore até o limite a própria racionalidade humana Palavras-chave: Descartes; Homem; Ideia; Conceito; Definição. Considerations on the impossibility of defining man based on Descartes Abstract: The aim of this text is to reflect on the meaning of the rejection of the traditional definition of man performed by Descartes when he attempts to understand what we are. This rejection is the result of a new method of philosophizing, which we may designate as the way of ideas—that which emerges from the forces of one’s own spirit to examine all that occurs within it and in any other thing, avoiding the use of presuppositions. To highlight this difference of perspective and the reiterated willingness of this French philosopher in elaborating it, we indicate the limitation of the notion of concept—whether that of the Aristotelian-Scholastic tradition or the post-Cartesian tradition, strongly characterized by scientific representation—to deal with the problematic of the phenomenon of the human. In this respect, we stress the richness and amplitude of the notion of idea, elaborated and re-elaborated over years by this philosopher, to address this complex phenomenon. Since man is not a substance, the manifestation of his aspects is always adjectival, allowing qualification without, however, providing comprehension. This difficulty of perception therefore requires that the study of the idea of man explore human rationality itself to the greatest extent. Keywords: Descartes; Man; Idea; Concept; Definition. Considérations sur l'impossibilité de définir l'homme à partir de Descartes Resumé: On se propose, dans ce texte, de réfléchir sur le sens du rejet de la définition traditionnelle de l'homme faite par Descartes, lorsqu'il tente de comprendre ce que nous sommes. Ce rejet est le résultat d'une nouvelle méthode de philosopher, que nous pourrions désigner comme la voie des idées - celle qui part des forces de l'esprit lui-même pour examiner tout ce qui se passe en lui et en toute autre chose, en évitant d'utiliser des présupposés. Pour marquer cette différence de perspective et la disposition réitérée du philosophe français dans son élaboration, nous soulignons la limitation de la notion de concept - soit celle de la tradition aristotélicienne-scolastique, soit celle post-cartésienne, fortement marquée par la représentation scientifique - pour rendre compte de la problématique du phénomène humain. En ce sens, nous insistons sur la richesse et l'amplitude de la notion d'idée - élaborée et retravaillée au fil des années par Descartes - pour faire face à ce phénomène complexe. Une fois l'homme n'est plus une substance, la manifestation de ses aspects reste toujours adjective, pouvant le qualifier sans toutefois favoriser sa compréhension. Cette difficulté d'appréhension exige donc que l'étude de l'idée de l'homme explore jusqu'à la limite la rationalité humaine elle-même. Mots-clés: Descartes; Homme; Idée; Concept; Définition. (shrink)

Pode o mestre ensinar algo através da fala? Uma análise sobre as obras De Magistro de Santo Agostinho e Tomás de Aquino Resumo: O presente artigo tem como objetivo investigar nas obras De Magistro de Santo Agostinho e Tomás de Aquino a possibilidade do ensino através da figura do mestre e/ou de um agente externo ao discípulo ou indivíduo. Agostinho defende a tese da qual só Deus ensina e a figura do mestre torna-se apenas como um auxiliador no processo de (...) aprendizagem para a verdade interior do discípulo, tese essa formulada através da sua Teoria da Iluminação. Tomás de Aquino não contradiz completamente Agostinho, mas defende o papel e a importância do mestre sobre o tipo de conhecimento que o mesmo pode fornecer ao discípulo, tendo papel substancial para o processo de aprendizagem para adquirir conhecimento. Ambos se preocupam em que medida o mestre pode ensinar, o que ensina e como ensina, visando compreender como se dá o processo de conhecimento do ser humano o relacionando-o com a verdade das coisas. Palavras-chave: Santo Agostinho; Tomás de Aquino; De Magistro; Ensino; Aprendizagem. Can the master teach something through speech? An analysis of the works De Magistro of Saint Augustine and Thomas Aquinas Abstract: This article aims to investigate in the works De Magistro of Saint Augustine and Thomas Aquinas the possibility of teaching through the figure of the master and / or an external agent to the disciple or individual. Augustine defends the thesis that only God teaches and the figure of the master becomes only as a helper in the learning process for the disciple's inner truth, a thesis formulated through his Theory of Enlightenment. Thomas Aquinas does not completely contradict Augustine, but he defends the role and the importance of the master on the type of knowledge that he can provide to the disciple, having a substantial role in the learning process to acquire knowledge. Both are concerned with the extent to which the master can teach, what he teaches and how he teaches with a view to understanding how the human being's knowledge process takes place, relating it to the truth of things. Keywords: Saint Augustine; Thomas Aquinas; De Magistro; Teaching; Learning. ¿Puede el maestro enseñar algo a través del habla? Un análisis de las obras De Magistro de San Agustín y Tomás de Aquino Resumen: Este artículo tiene como objetivo investigar en las obras De Magistro de Santo Agostinho y Tomás de Aquino la posibilidad de enseñar a través de la figura del maestro y / o de un agente externo al discípulo o individuo. Agustín defiende la tesis de que sólo Dios enseña y la figura del maestro se convierte sólo en un ayudante en el proceso de aprendizaje de la verdad interior del discípulo, tesis formulada a través de su Teoría de la Ilustración. Tomás de Aquino no contradice completamente a Agustín, pero defiende el papel y la importancia del maestro sobre el tipo de conocimientos que puede aportar al discípulo, teniendo un papel sustancial en el proceso de aprendizaje para adquirir conocimientos. Ambos se preocupan por la medida en que el maestro puede enseñar, lo que enseña y cómo enseña, con el objetivo de comprender cómo se produce el proceso de conocimiento del ser humano, relacionándolo con la verdad de las cosas. Palabras-clave: San Agustín; Tomás de Aquino; De Magistro; Enseñando; Aprendizaje. Data de registro: 16/08/2020 Data de aceite: 16/12/2020. (shrink)

Lamarck's evolutionary theory has been regarded as groundless speculation by both coeval naturalists and modern historians of science. Lamarck is usually regarded as belonging to the group of the " idéologues" – followers of Condillac, with a strong empiricist outlook. Indeed, Lamarck refers respectfully to Condillac, and in his methodological discourse presents himself as an empiricist. However, if one compares his evolutionary theory with the empiricist requirements, Lamarck's work should be dismissed as groundless – a mere metaphysical " système" – (...) in the pejorative sense used by the followers of Condillac. There is, however, another way of looking at Lamarck's method. The analysis of his later works – specially Histoire naturelle des animaux sans vertèbres and Système analytique des connaissances positives de l'homme – shows that he did not follow an empiricist method. His point of departure is indeed metaphysical, but it is exactly the kind of metaphysics now accepted by the biological sciences: a strict physicalism, that requires that all natural phenomena be explained by natural laws. Following this requirement, Lamarck's method seems the best available solution of that time to the fundamental biological problems: the nature, origin and structure of living bodies. Lamarck's work was criticized as purely speculative and non-scientific because it was evaluated in the context of empiricism. He was not altogether clear about his method and maybe he did not realize that he was departing from the empiricist tradition. The reinterpretation of Lamarck's theory from the point of view of his non-empiricist physicalism allows a favorable evaluation of his work. RESUMO: A teoria evolucionista de Lamarck tem sido considerada como uma especulação sem fundamento, tanto por naturalistas de sua época quanto por historiadores atuais da ciência. Lamarck é usualmente considerado como pertencendo ao grupo do "idéologues" – seguidores de Condillac, com uma forte tendência empirista. De fato, Lamarck se refere com respeito a Condillac, e em seu discurso metodológico apresenta a si próprio como empirista. No entanto, se compararmos sua teoria evolucionista com as exigências empiristas, o trabalho de Lamarck deveria ser rejeitado como desprovido de fundamentos – um mero "système" metafísico – no sentido pejorativo utilizado pelos seguidores de Condillac. Há, no entanto, outro modo de considerar o método de Lamarck. A análise de seus últimos trabalhos – especialmente os livros Histoire naturelle des animaux sans vertèbres and Système analytique des connaissances positives de l'homme – mostra que ele não seguia um método empirista. Seu ponto de partida era na realidade metafísico, mas é exatamente o tipo de metafísica que é atualmente aceita pelas ciências biológicas: um fisicalismo estrito, que exige que todos os fenômenos naturais sejam explicados por leis naturais. Seguindo essa exigência, o método de Lamarck parece a melhor solução disponível naquela época para os fenômenos biológicos fundamentais: a natureza, a origem e a estrutura dos seres vivos. O trabalho de Lamarck foi criticado como puramente especulativo e não-científico porque foi avaliado no contexto do empirismo. Ele não foi totalmente claro sobre seu método, e talvez ele próprio não tivesse percebido que estava se afastando da tradição empirista. A reinterpretação da teoria de Lamarck sob o ponto de vista de seu fisicalismo não empirista permite uma avaliação positiva de seu trabalho. (shrink)

Se uma parte da filosofia ocidental contemporânea passou a considerar os animais não-humanos como dignos de reconhecimento moral, isto se deu em grande parte ao salto no entendimento ético no qual Arthur Schopenhauer contribuiu imensamente. Tal evento se deu da ética racionalista, das aparências, defendida pela filosofia tradicional, para a ética essencialista e extensionista das vivências pensadas pelo filósofo pessimista. Enquanto a ética tradicional baseia-se no ideal de dever – pela abstração, portanto restrito ao “eu”, a prolongar as relações de (...) domínio e expansão da dor – a ética essencialista faz outro caminho. Pela via da intuição, a destronar a razão, é somente ao reconhecimento da unidade entre todos os seres por meio da vontade expressa em sofrimento que a ética pode ser verdadeira e, assim, anti-especista. Para compreender tais afirmações, dispomos do apoio teórico das pensadoras María Jesús Saravia San Martín e de Sônia Felipe. (shrink)

la82 12.00 Normal 0 21 false false false PT-BR X-NONE X-NONE MicrosoftInternetExplorer4 /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Tabela normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; mso-para-margin-top:0cm; mso-para-margin-right:0cm; mso-para-margin-bottom:10.0pt; mso-para-margin-left:0cm; line-height:115%; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-language:EN-US;} A epistemologia evolutiva é uma corrente que tenta explicar o conhecimento humano em conformidade com a descriçáo feita dele pelas ciências biológicas. Deste ponto de vista a seleçáo natural concorre como causa da presença, no ser humano, da atitude (...) racional. Uma das principais críticas contra esta corrente epistemológica, proposta por Thomas Nagel, apóia-se no argumento de que um conceito de racionalidade derivado das realizações de uma teoria científica – a teoria da evoluçáo – náo pode ser utilizado para explicar a validade universal das regras segundo as quais esta racionalidade opera. Esta crítica pode, segundo a tese aqui proposta, ser suficientemente respondida, a partir de uma consideraçáo adequada da noçáo de natureza humana, como composta de princípios e mecanismos que estariam na origem da capacidade racional encontrada no ser humano. Michael Ruse oferece uma estratégia de resposta do ponto de vista naturalista. O que se afirma neste trabalho é que há uma outra estratégia de resposta possível à crítica de Nagel contra a legitimidade da epistemologia evolutiva, que se apóia na analogia entre a evoluçáo biológica e a evoluçáo do conhecimento no ambiente da cultura. (shrink)

Esta mesa-redonda foi organizada a partir do encontro de seus autores em um simpósio sobre historiografia no 55º Congresso Internacional de Americanistas, que ocorreu em julho de 2015, em San Salvador. O simpósio em questão foi o de número 69, Historia de la historiografía latinoamericana: nuevas miradas y debates contemporáneos. Os trabalhos aqui apresentados pelo guatemalteco Jose Edgardo Cal Montoya, “La historia como profesión”: el aporte de Ernesto Chinchilla Aguilar a la historiografía guatemalteca y centroamericana e o paraguaio Herib Caballero (...) Campos, Entre Clío y Astra: La Biblioteca Paraguaya del Centro de Estudiantes de Derecho, envolveram estudos historiográficos de temáticas nacionais específicas, respectivamente sobre a figura de um intelectual, e de uma instituição responsável pela divulgação de uma produção do conhecimento. Já os artigos de Coralia Gutiérrez Álvarez, Una introducción a la epistemología desde el sur: por una reflexión situada e Felix Raúl Martínez Cleves, La historiografía en movimiento. Una aproximación a las historias de ciudades en Colombia buscaram um outro viés na discussão historiográfica. Algo que diz respeito não somente a uma análise crítica, denominador comum a todos os quatro artigos, senão um diálogo com a teoria que implicou deslocar de uma zona de conforto a própria historiografia colombiana, para o caso dos estudos da história das cidades feito por Felix Martínez, e mais amplamente o conjunto das denominadas Ciências Sociais, como a discussão proposta por Coralia Gutiérrez. A mim coube analisar os quatro artigos, bem como buscar apontar possíveis diálogos entre os mesmos. Uma menor propensão de minha parte a debates teóricos, e uma maior facilidade a estudos com base mais histórica, como nos trabalhos de Jose Cal e Herib Caballero, se refletiram na maior extensão que dei no trato destes últimos; nada mais do que isso. E de antemão quero agradecer a Felix Martínez, cujos esclarecimentos possibilitaram divisar melhor uma ponte entre todos os trabalhos. (shrink)

O texto propõe articular a interpretação heideggeriana da verdade à luz da concepção de memória/reminiscência elaborada por Martin Heidegger em sua leitura fenomenológico-hermenêutica de Platão. Para tanto, o trabalho aproxima as interpretações apresentadas pelo filósofo alemão em dois textos complementares, a saber, Platons Lehre von der Wahrheit e Parmenides , tendo como pano de fundo a hipótese de que a memória não se constitui sem ter por base uma perda originária, um ‘ao menos um’ que jamais comparece na totalidade do (...) que se desvela, mas que serve de reserva e fonte para todo o pensar e dizer dos pensadores. Normal 0 21 false false false PT-BR X-NONE X-NONE /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Tabela normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; mso-para-margin-top:0cm; mso-para-margin-right:0cm; mso-para-margin-bottom:10.0pt; mso-para-margin-left:0cm; line-height:115%; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-language:EN-US;}. (shrink)

Alumnos con discapacidad: modelo de inclusión de la Universidad Federal de San Carlos Resumen: El objetivo fue describir cómo funciona el programa de inclusión para alumnos con discapacidad en la Universidad Federal de San Carlos, en Brasil. Es una investigación cualitativa con análisis del discurso de cuatro entrevistas semiestructuradas con alumnos con discapacidad, investigadores especialistas y gestores. Los principales resultados muestran que no es suficiente trabajar sobre los ejes de atención a estos estudiantes sino se analizan y evalúan las funciones (...) de los actores involucrados en el proceso de inclusión. Es necesaria una estructura que promueva cambios culturales en la comunidad universitaria, de otro modo, las barreras actitudinales siguen siendo uno de los principales límites para estos alumnos. Palabras clave: Educación Superior; Discapacidad; Educación Especial; Educación Inclusiva. Alunos com deficiência: modelo de inclusão na Universidade Federal de São Carlos Resumo: O objetivo desta pesquisa foi descrever o funcionamento do programa de inclusão para alunos com deficiência na Universidade Federal de São Carlos, Brasil. Trata-se de uma pesquisa qualitativa com base na análise do discurso de quatro entrevistas semiestruturadas com alunos com deficiência, pesquisadores especializados e gestores. Os resultados centrais mostram que não é suficiente trabalhar sobre os eixos principais de atenção a estes alunos, que deve-se analisar e avaliar as funções dos atores envolvidos no processo de inclusão, e é preciso uma estrutura que motive uma mudança cultural na comunidade universitária, caso contrário, as barreiras atitudinais continuam sendo limites principais para estes alunos. Palavras-chave: Ensino Superior; Deficiência; Educação Especial; Educação Inclusiva. Students with disabilities: inclusion model of Federal University of São Carlos Abstract: The objective of the study is to describe the inclusion program for students with disability in the Federal University of São Carlos, in Brazil. A qualitative study based on discourse analysis of four semi-structured interviews with students with disability, specialist researchers, and managers. The main results shows that is not enough to focus on the principal subjects of inclusive education, instead, it’s necessary to analyze responsibilities of every actor involved in the inclusion process, motivation based structure is needed towards a cultural change. Otherwise, attitudinal barriers of the university community continue to be one of the principal limits for these students. Key words: Higher Education; Disability; Especial Education; Inclusive Education. Data de registro: 04/03/2020 Data de aceite: 28/08/2020. (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)

A problemática do justo relacionamento entre o sagrado e o profano foi objecto de uma particular clarificação no Concílio Vaticano II. Ao estabelecer o conceito de secularidade como estatuto que compete à ordem temporal ou da natureza em face da ordem sobrenatural ou da graça, aquela instância do magistério da Igreja legitimou a sua aplicação ao domínio da cultura em geral e da filosofia em especial. A secularidade é aí definida como autonomia relativa. Como tal, ela representa a posição justa (...) entre dois possíveis excessos: o do secularismo e o do sacralismo. Afirmá-la da filosofia, na hipótese da sua elaboração por um filósofo cristão, implica em primeiro lugar admitir que, para este, existe a possibilidade de ser verdadeiramente filósofo sem necessidade de renunciar ou colocar entre parêntesis a sua condição de cristão. Por outro lado, essa condição de filósofo cristão tem implícita uma atitude de abertura mútua, no seu espírito, entre a fé religiosa e a razão filosofante, da qual porém não resulta para este prejuízo mas benefício. Na recta atitude secular, pois, a autonomia supõe que a razão filosófica não perde a sua dignidade, o seu valor e a sua função próprios, deixando-os absorver totalitariamente pela fé; em compensação, porém, o carácter relativo de uma tal autonomia impede que esta seja ignorada por aquela, perdendo-a de vista no seu horizonte filosófico. Sacralismo fideísta e secularismo racionalista estão aí necessariamente ausentes. A possibilidade de uma filosofia qualificada de cristã parece decorrer de uma abordagem do problema por este prima. ///La problématique des relations correctes entre le sacré et le profane a fait l'object d'une clarification spéciale au Concile de Vatican II. Par le fait d'établir le concept de sécularité comme statut qui revient à l'ordre temporel ou a celui de la nature face a l'ordre surnaturel ou de la-grace, l'instance du Magistère de l'Eglise a legitimé son application au domaine de la culture en général et de la philosophie en particulier. La sécularité y est définie comme autonomie relative. En tant que telle, elle représente la position juste entre deux excés possibles: celui du sécularisme et du sacralisme. L'affirmer de la philosophie, dans l'hypothèse de son élaboration par un philosophe chrétien,implique en premier lieu que Ton admette que pour celui-ci, il est possible d'être vraiment philosophe sans nécessairement à sa condition de chrétien ou sans devoir la mettre entre parenthèses. Par ailleurs, cette condition de philosophe chrétien présuppose implicitement une attitude d'ouverture mutuelle, en son esprit, entre la foi religieuse et la raison pensante, ouverture dont pourtant il ne resulte pour celle-ci aucun préjudice, mais bien un acquis positif. Car dans l'attitude seculiere correcte, l'autonomie suppose que la raison philosophique ne perde pas sa dignite, sa valeur et sa fonction propre, en se laissant absorber totalitairement par la foi; en revanche, cependant, le caractere relatif d'une telle autonomie empeche que celle-ci soit ignoree par celle-la, la perdant de vue dans son horizon philosophique. Sacralisme fideiste et secularisme rationaliste doivent la disparaitre. La possibility d'une philosophic qualifiee de chretienne semble surgir d'une approche du probleme par ce biais. /// The problem of the proper relation between the sacred and the profane was object of a particular clarification in the Council Vatican II. In establishing the idea of secularity as a statute which belongs to the temporal order or of the nature in view of the supernatural or of grace, that instance of the Church teaching made lawful its application to the domain of culture in general, and of philosophy in particular. Secularity is there defined as relative autonomy. As such, it represents the right position between two possible excesses: on one side the secularism, and on the other side the sacredness. To affirm it of philosophy, supposings its elaboration is made by a Christian philosopher, implies first of all to admit that for this the possibility exists of being truly philosopher, without needing to renounce or to put between parentheses his condition of Christian. On the other hand, this condition of Christian philosopher contains implicit an attitude of natural openness in his mind, between religious faith and philosophizing reason, from which however no harm results for it at all, but benefit. In the right attitude of secular, therefore, the autonomy supposes that the philosophical reason doesn't loose its own dignity, its value and its function, letting itself absorve wholly by faith; in compensation however the relative character of such an autonomy prevents this from being ignored by the other, loosing sight of it in its philosophical horizon. Fideistic sacradness and rationalistic secularism are there absent. The possibility of a philosophy qualified as Christian seems to derive from an approach of the problem from this point of view. (shrink)

kk states that knowing entails knowing that one knows, and K¬K states that not knowing entails knowing that one does not know. In light of the arguments against kk and K¬K⁠, one might consider modally qualified variants of those principles. According to weak kk, knowing entails the possibility of knowing that one knows. And according to weakK¬K⁠, not knowing entails the possibility of knowing that one does not know. This paper shows that weak kk and weakK¬K are much stronger than (...) they initially appear. Jointly, they entail kk and K¬K⁠. And they are susceptible to variants of the standard arguments against kk and K¬K⁠. This has interesting implications for the debate on positive introspection and for deeper issues concerning the structure and limits of knowability. (shrink)

Fitch’s Paradox shows that if every truth is knowable, then every truth is known. Standard diagnoses identify the factivity/negative infallibility of the knowledge operator and Moorean contradictions as the root source of the result. This paper generalises Fitch’s result to show that such diagnoses are mistaken. In place of factivity/negative infallibility, the weaker assumption of any ‘level-bridging principle’ suffices. A consequence is that the result holds for some logics in which the “Moorean contradiction” commonly thought to underlie the result is (...) in fact consistent. This generalised result improves on the current understanding of Fitch’s result and widens the range of modalities of philosophical interest to which the result might be fruitfully applied. Along the way, we also consider a semantic explanation for Fitch’s result which answers a challenge raised by Kvanvig. (shrink)

To what extent does perceptual language reflect universals of experience and cognition, and to what extent is it shaped by particular cultural preoccupations? This paper investigates the universality~relativity of perceptual language by examining the use of basic perception terms in spontaneous conversation across 13 diverse languages and cultures. We analyze the frequency of perception words to test two universalist hypotheses: that sight is always a dominant sense, and that the relative ranking of the senses will be the same across different (...) cultures. We find that references to sight outstrip references to the other senses, suggesting a pan-human preoccupation with visual phenomena. However, the relative frequency of the other senses was found to vary cross-linguistically. Cultural relativity was conspicuous as exemplified by the high ranking of smell in Semai, an Aslian language. Together these results suggest a place for both universal constraints and cultural shaping of the language of perception. (shrink)

Apart from references to perception, words such asseeandlistenhave shared, non-literal meanings across diverse languages. Such cross-linguistic meanings have not been systematically investigated as they appear in their natural home — informal spoken interaction. We present a qualitative examination of the semantic associations of perception verbs based on recorded everyday conversation in thirteen diverse languages. Across these diverse communities, spontaneous interaction provides evidence for two commonly-discussed extensions of perception verbs — perception~cognition, hearing~linguistic communication — as well as illustrating other meanings and (...) functions (e.g., the use of perception verbs as discourse markers) that have been less appreciated heretofore. The range of usage that is readily observable in informal conversation makes it clear that this type of data must take center stage for the empirically grounded study of semantics. Moreover, these data suggest that commonalities in polysemous meanings may rely not only on universal cognition, but also on the universal exigencies of social interaction. (shrink)

In this paper I assess the adequacy of no-conspiracy conditions employed in the usual derivations of the Bell inequality in the context of EPR correlations. First, I look at the EPR correlations from a purely phenomenological point of view and claim that common cause explanations of these cannot be ruled out. I argue that an appropriate common cause explanation requires that no-conspiracy conditions are re-interpreted as mere common cause-measurement independence conditions. In the right circumstances then, violations of measurement independence need (...) not entail any kind of conspiracy (nor backwards in time causation). To the contrary, if measurement operations in the EPR context are taken to be causally relevant in a specific way to the experiment outcomes, their explicit causal role provides the grounds for a common cause explanation of the corresponding correlations. (shrink)

Augment the propositional language with two modal operators: □ and ■. Define ⧫ to be the dual of ■, i.e. ⧫=¬■¬. Whenever (X) is of the form φ → ψ, let (X⧫) be φ→⧫ψ . (X⧫) can be thought of as the modally qualified counterpart of (X)—for instance, under the metaphysical interpretation of ⧫, where (X) says φ implies ψ, (X⧫) says φ implies possibly ψ. This paper shows that for various interesting instances of (X), fairly weak assumptions suffice for (...) (X⧫) to imply (X)—so, the modally qualified principle is as strong as its unqualified counterpart. These results have surprising and interesting implications for issues spanning many areas of philosophy. (shrink)

This article studies the differences between traditional financial intermediaries (commercial banks, savings banks and cooperative banks) and ethical banks based on property rights, in which the owner decides the ideology, principles, standards and objectives of the organisation. In ethical banking, affinity centres on positive social and ethical values. The article consequendy focuses on an index proposed both to differentiate ethical banks from other types of banks, and also to pinpoint the differences between the various ethical banks themselves.This is the Radical (...) Affinity Index (RAI), which groups banks together in terms of their stance on ethical commitment, concentrating on ethical ideology and principles (information transparency, placement of assets, guarantees and participation) and using a sample of 114 European banks. The evidence shows that transparency of information and placement of assets are factors that differentiate ethical banks from other financial intermediaries.Guarantees and participation are characteristics specific to ethical banks; these variables, however, do not offer clear evidence to our analysis. (shrink)

After the publication of Begriffsschrift, a conflict erupted between Frege and Schröder regarding their respective logical systems which emerged around the Leibnizian notions of lingua characterica and calculus ratiocinator. Both of them claimed their own logic to be a better realisation of Leibniz’s ideal language and considered the rival system a mere calculus ratiocinator. Inspired by this polemic, van Heijenoort (1967b) distinguished two conceptions of logic—logic as language and logic as calculus—and presented them as opposing views, but did not explain (...) Frege’s and Schröder’s conceptions of the fulfilment of Leibniz’s scientific ideal. -/- In this paper I explain the reasons for Frege’s and Schröder’s mutual accusations of having created a mere calculus ratiocinator. On the one hand, Schröder’s construction of the algebra of relatives fits with a project for the reduction of any mathematical concept to the notion of relative. From this stance I argue that he deemed the formal system of Begriffsschrift incapable of such a reduction. On the other hand, first I argue that Frege took Boolean logic to be an abstract logical theory inadequate for the rendering of specific content; then I claim that the language of Begriffsschrift did not constitute a complete lingua characterica by itself, more being seen by Frege as a tool that could be applied to scientific disciplines. Accordingly, I argue that Frege’s project of constructing a lingua characterica was not tied to his later logicist programme. (shrink)

Die vorliegende Studie interpretiert Hegels Schlußlehre aus ihrem historischen und systematischen Zusammenhang. Der Beitrag der Schlußlehre besteht in dem Nachweis, daß die gängigen Theorien von der Natur des Begriffs - verstanden als ein Merkmal oder eine Klasse von Gegenständen - die Funktion des mittleren Terms nicht zu erklären vermögen. Mit der Schlußlehre verfolgt Hegel keine formallogische Zielsetzung, sondern bewegt sich ganz im Rahmen seiner spekulativen Metaphysik.

This paper is a contribution to the general study of consequence relations which contain (definable) connective of “disjunction”. Our work is centered around the “proof by cases property”, we present several of its equivalent definitions, and show some interesting applications, namely in constructing axiomatic systems for intersections of logics and recognizing weakly implicative fuzzy logics among the weakly implicative ones.

An l-hemi-implicative semilattice is an algebra $$\mathbf {A} =$$ A= such that $$$$ is a semilattice with a greatest element 1 and satisfies: for every $$a,b,c\in A$$ a,b,c∈A, $$a\le b\rightarrow c$$ a≤b→c implies $$a\wedge b \le c$$ a∧b≤c and $$a\rightarrow a = 1$$ a→a=1. An l-hemi-implicative semilattice is commutative if if it satisfies that $$a\rightarrow b = b\rightarrow a$$ a→b=b→a for every $$a,b\in A$$ a,b∈A. It is shown that the class of l-hemi-implicative semilattices is a variety. These algebras provide (...) a general framework for the study of different algebras of interest in algebraic logic. In any l-hemi-implicative semilattice it is possible to define an derived operation by $$a \sim b := \wedge$$ a∼b:=∧. Endowing $$$$ with the binary operation $$\sim$$ ∼ the algebra $$$$ results an l-hemi-implicative semilattice, which also satisfies the identity $$a \sim b = b \sim a$$ a∼b=b∼a. In this article, we characterize the commutative l-hemi-implicative semilattices. We also provide many new examples of l-hemi-implicative semilattice on any semillatice with greatest element. Finally, we characterize congruences on the classes of l-hemi-implicative semilattices introduced earlier and we characterize the principal congruences of l-hemi-implicative semilattices. (shrink)

These days, the radicalization of young people is above all viewed as a security risk. Almost all research into this phenomenon has been carried out from a legal, criminological or socio-psychological perspective with a focus on detecting and containing the risks posed by radicalization. In the light of the political developments since September 11, 2001, this is entirely understandable but perhaps not altogether wise. Research and theory development from a pedagogical perspective can also make a significant contribution towards a better (...) understanding of radicalization processes and possibly offer new points of departure for intervention strategies. On the basis of five typical cases, the authors examine the role of educators, social workers and teachers, and the problems they face when dealing with young people with extreme ideals. This article attempts to provide insight into the pedagogical conditions for the development of extreme ideals and suggests starting points for developing effective countermeasures. (shrink)

In this essay, I connect my work on Archipelago studies with Édouard Glissant’s notions of relationality and Caribbean confederations to formulate what I denominate as the erotics of archipelagic thinking. My main goal is to share my process of thinking with and through Glissant’s work to focus on a series of theoretical gestures that have allowed me to propose modes of reading literary depictions of Caribbean con/federations that go beyond the binary opposition between colonialism and nationalism. I am performing an (...) exercise that I assign to my students when I teach the “Introduction to Critical Theory” course at the University of Miami. Instead of writing an essay with a short theoretical introduction followed by a detailed close reading of literary and cultural texts that illustrate a keyword or a theoretical insight, I conduct a methodological meditation in which I theorize the archipelagic as a form of relationality that configures an erotic imaginary beyond the nuclear family and towards affective networks. To think about the Caribbean as an archipelagic formation, I use my comparative work on the Antillean Confederation in the Hispanic Caribbean (1860-1898) and the West Indies Federation in the English Caribbean (1958-1962) as a historical context in which the region congealed as a network of locations “act[ing] in concert.". (shrink)

The family has a decisive influence on the construction of youth leisure, as the domain of coexistence in which people spend their free time and as a main agent in leisure activities. The manner of this influence depends on various factors or circumstances, among which how the family functions internally emerges as one of the most important. Scientific research has produced contradictory findings, undermining theories that the family’s style of upbringings, educational and/or economic level, parental behaviour and family structure are (...) influential factors in teenagers’ physical and sports leisure, while bolstering the idea of the importance of family cohesion, communication and flexibility in the way the family functions. Further study of these factors is therefore warranted, and family action-intervention-education programmes need to be designed to boost young people’s autonomy and responsibility with regard to their leisure. (shrink)