870 resultados para history of ideas
Resumo:
The article reconstructs the largely forgotten role of key Brazilian intellectuals in the Latins-versus-Anglo-Saxons debates that developed around 1898, emphasizing the embeddedness of their thinking in the transnational crossings of men and ideas within South America. It thus challenges the common depiction of late-nineteenth-century Latin Americanism as a purely Spanish American phenomenon and of the United States as its major catalyst, allowing a more nuanced understanding of this movement' s nature.
Resumo:
"Sur un ton humoristique, les auteurs avouent être des voleurs… d’idées. À quoi riment les lois sur le droit d’auteur demandent-ils ? À l’origine, ce ne sont pas les droits des créateurs que le souverain ou l’État voulait protéger, mais bien les privilèges des éditeurs. Et d’où vient qu’on ait ainsi accordé à ces derniers le droit exclusif de publier ? C’est que dès l’invention de l’imprimerie, les hommes de pouvoir ont bien vu la menace que représentait pour eux la dissémination des idées : le calcul qu’ils ont fait a profité aux imprimeurs. Le phénomène n’est pas étranger à l’existence des permis de radiodiffusion / télévision existant de nos jours dans nos États démocratiques ; et l’histoire se répète comme on l’observe aujourd’hui quant à la régulation du réseau Internet. Quand les éditeurs se rendirent compte qu’ils ne pouvaient plus avoir la main haute sur tout ce qui se publiait, ils ont pris prétexte du droit des créateurs pour protéger leurs propres intérêts. Ni l’éthique ni l’esthétique ne motivaient les éditeurs , mais bien leurs seuls intérêts commerciaux, légitimes au demeurant. Deux factions s’opposent aujourd’hui quant à la question du droit des auteurs à l’ère numérique. La vieille garde se bat pour préserver à peu de choses près le statu quo tandis que ses vis-à-vis proclament la mort du droit d’auteur tel qu’il a existé. Et quel modèle nouveau préconisent ces derniers ? En fait, ils ne s’opposent pas à toute forme de protection pour ceux qui traditionnellement en ont bénéficié, mais songent à des mécanismes nouveaux …, de sorte que la vieille garde n’a pas à s’en faire outre mesure. Le fond du problème est ailleurs soutiennent MM. Benyekhlef et Tresvant : même si les avocats plaideront que ce ne sont pas les idées, mais bien la forme particulière qu’un créateur a choisie pour les exprimer qu’on protège par les lois sur le droit d’auteur, cela ne change rien. Dès qu’une idée est exprimée et fixée d’une certaine manière, il devient plus difficile de l’exprimer à nouveau puisqu’une partie du champ virtuel qu’elle pouvait occuper est déjà conquise, à bon droit selon le droit actuel. Il faut en conclure que le droit d’auteur nouveau, comme le droit d’auteur traditionnel, est une entrave à la libre circulation des idées."
Resumo:
This essay traces the development of Otto Neurath’s ideas that led to the publication of one of the first series of children’s books produced by the Isotype Institute in the late 1940s, the Visual History of Mankind. Described in its publicity material as ‘new in content’ and ‘new in method’, it embodied much of Otto Neurath’s thinking about visual education, and also coincided with other educational ideas in the UK in the 1930s and 1940s. It exemplified the Isotype Institute’s approach: teamwork, thinking about the needs of younger readers, clear explanation, and accessible content. Further, drawing on correspondence, notes and drawings from the Otto and Marie Neurath Isotype Collection at the University of Reading, the essay presents insights to the making of the books and the people involved, the costs of production and the influence of this on design decisions, and how the books were received by teachers and children.
Resumo:
This article examines the role played by ideas and their thinkers in Christopher Hill's histories of the English Revolution. Hill protested against a reductionist economic determinism with no place for the intrinsic power of ideas, but his account of ideas gave them a progressive logic parallel to, if not always easy to link with, that of economic development, and threatened to divorce them from their muddled and imperfect thinkers. This account of the logic of ideas had a striking impact on the way in which the more mainstream radicals of the English Revolution appeared in Hill's work, with both the Levellers and James Harrington being half assimilated to, and half pushed aside in favor of, the more thoroughgoing economic radicals who expressed, in however ragged a way, the intrinsic potential of their ideas. However, Hill's writings also betray a surprising attraction to religious over secular forms of radicalism.
Resumo:
In my thesis, I explore the cultural history of the French Revolution and its relation to the modern era which ensued. Many historians have studied the French Revolution as it relates to culture, the rise of modernity, and fashion. I combine the unique histories of all three of these aspects to reach an understanding of the history of the French Revolution and fashion’s role in bringing about change. In the majority of literature of costume history, discussion of fashion surrounds its reflective properties. Many historians conclude fashion as a reflection of the broader cultural shifts that occurred during the Revolution. I, on the other hand, propose that fashion is an active force in bringing out cultural change during this time. In exploring fashion as a historical motivator, I examine the aesthetic world of fashion from 1740 to 1815, the modern system of cultural dissemination of fashion through particular historical heroes, and the rise of “taste” and its relation to modern identity. Through aesthetics, culture, and identity, I argue that fashion is a decisive force of culture in that it creates a visual world through which ideas form and communicate.
Resumo:
The Illinois Institute of Technology (iit) campus, Chicago, by architect Ludwig Mies van der Rohe, is often considered as a transitional work, usually acknowledged as significant for the reorientation of his professional career after he emigrated to the United States. Moreover, its favorable recognition today is somehow indicative of its relevance as a model for urban intervention in the contemporary American city and for contemporary city planning in general, not to mention the profound impact that it had on the cityscape of Chicago. However, today we know it was rather the result of a close collaboration between he and Ludwig Hilberseimer —later on, to be completed with Alfred Caldwell— who merged their personal ideas and expertise in the design for the first time. In addition to this, when one tries to locate the design within its own historical context and evaluate the sources of its approach to it, some contradictions arise. The major impact of the images produced by Mies to promote its realization —widely disseminated in most contemporary architectural periodicals— probably outshined the particular circumstances in which the design was conceived. In fact, it would never be materialized as originally presented, but it was, instead, continuously reworked according to land availability in the site —a circumstance often ignored by subsequent architectural critic, that enthusiastically praised the design even before it was fully completed. One of the main consequences of looking at iit from such a standpoint is that, when historically contextualized, one can appreciate that, due to the urban scale of its implementation process, the design had to face a complex reality very different to that initially planned by the architect, often far from his actual possibilities of intervention. Such approach is in contradiction with the common description of the design as a ‘tabula rasa’ that allegedly would have been formulated on the basis of a full denial of its context. On the contrary, the ever-changing circumstances of the design motivated a necessary re-interpretation of the relation between its executed fragments, in order to keep the original identity of the whole in an ever-changing context. This situation implied a continuous transformation of the design by means of a steady re-composition of its elements: as the number of completed buildings increased in its successive stages, their relation to their site-specific context changed, in a very particular process that these lines try to delineate. Requiring decades to be erected, neither of its authors would ever see the design finished as planned, partially because of the difficulties in acquiring the extension of land that it required. Considering the study of this process as able to provide a valuable gateway to understand the urban discourse that the architects entailed, the aim of these lines is to analyze the problems that the iit campus design had to face. As a starting point, a relationship between practice and theory in the activity of the authors implied in iit campus design has been assumed. Far from being interrupted during World War ii, strong historical evidence can be found to infer that both were developed in parallel. Consequently, the historical sequence of the preserved testimonies has been put into context, as well as their transformation while Mies remained in charge for the campus Master Plan. Notably, when seen from this perspective, some ideas already expressed during his previous European practice were still present during the design process. Particularly, Mies's particular understanding of certain architectural concepts — such as those of ‘order’ and ‘structure’—can be traced paralleling the theories about urban planning from his collaborators, a fact that possibly facilitated the campus successful development. The study of the way these ideas were actually redeveloped and modified in the American urban context, added to the specific process of the implementation of iit campus design, sheds a new light for a critical interpretation of the reasons that made it possible, and of the actual responsibility of Mies's collaborators in its overall development and final completion. RESUMEN El campus del Illinois Institute of Technology (iit) de Chicago, obra del arquitecto Ludwig Mies van der Rohe, es a menudo considerado como una obra de transición que, por lo general, ha venido siendo reconocida como relevante para la reorientación de su carrera profesional posterior a su exilio en los Estados Unidos. El reconocimiento del que goza el proyecto es indicativo, de algún modo, de su importancia como modelo para la intervención urbana en la ciudad norteamericana contemporánea y el planeamiento de la ciudad contemporánea en general, sin olvidar el profundo impacto que ha tenido sobre el paisaje urbano de Chicago. Sin embargo, hoy sabemos que el resultado se benefició de su estrecha colaboración con Ludwig Hilberseimer y se completaría más tarde con la de Alfred Caldwell, quienes unieron sus ideas y experiencia profesional en el proyecto por primera vez. Asimismo, cuando se intenta ubicar el proyecto dentro de su propio contexto histórico y evaluar los criterios de su manera de abordarlo, surgen algunas contradicciones. El considerable impacto de las imágenes producidas por Mies para impulsar su ejecución —ampliamente difundidas en la mayoría de publicaciones de arquitectura de la época— probablemente eclipsó las particulares circunstancias en las que el proyecto fue concebido. De hecho, nunca llegó a materializarse tal y como fue inicialmente presentado. Por contra, fue reelaborado de manera continua, de acuerdo a la disponibilidad de suelo en el emplazamiento; una circunstancia a menudo ignorada por la crítica posterior, que elogió con entusiasmo el proyecto antes siquiera de que fuese terminado. Una de las principales consecuencias de contemplar el iit desde semejante punto de vista es que, una vez contextualizada históricamente su puesta en obra, se puede apreciar que el arquitecto tuvo que enfrentarse a una compleja realidad urbana muy diferente a la inicialmente prevista —probablemente debido a la escala del proyecto— a menudo lejos de sus posibilidades reales de intervención. Este enfoque contradice la descripción habitual del proyecto como una ‘tabula rasa’, que supuestamente se habría formulado sobre la base de una negación completa de su contexto. Por el contrario, las circunstancias cambiantes del proyecto obligaron una necesaria reinterpretación de la relación entre sus frag mentos ejecutados, con el fin de mantener la identidad original del conjunto en un contexto en constante cambio. Esta situación implicó una continua transformación del proyecto por medio de una permanente re-composición de sus elementos: según se incrementaba el número de edificios construidos en las etapas sucesivas de desarrollo del conjunto, variaba su relación con el contexto específico en que se emplazaban, en un proceso muy particular que estas líneas tratan de perfilar. Al necesitar décadas para ser levantado, ninguno de sus autores vería el conjunto terminado según lo planificado, en parte debido a las dificultades para la adquisición de la extensión de suelo que demandaba. Asumiendo que el estudio de este proceso es capaz de proporcionar una valiosa puerta de entrada para elucidar el discurso urbano asumido por los Mies, el objetivo de estas líneas es analizar los problemas a los que el proyecto del campus del iit tuvo que enfrentarse. Como punto de partida, se ha supuesto una relación entre la práctica y la teoría en la actividad de los autores implicados en el proyecto del campus del iit. Lejos de interrumpirse durante la Segunda Guerra Mundial, existen evidencias históricas sólidas para deducir que ambas vertientes se desarrollaron en paralelo. En consecuencia, se ha contextualizado la secuencia histórica de los testimonios conservados, así como su transformación durante el periodo en que Mies estuvo a cargo del Plan General del campus. Significativamente, al ser contempladas bajo esta perspectiva, algunas ideas ya expresadas durante su práctica europea anterior resultan aún presentes durante la redacción del proyecto. En concreto, se puede trazar un paralelismo entre la comprensión particular de Mies de ciertos conceptos arquitectónicos —como los de ‘orden’ y ‘estructura’— y las teorías sobre el urbanismo de sus colaboradores, hecho que posiblemente facilitó el exitoso desarrollo del proyecto. El estudio de la manera en que estas ideas fueron reelaboradas y modificadas en el contexto urbano estadounidense, sumado al proceso específico de su aplicación en el proyecto del campus del iit, arroja una nueva luz para una interpretación crítica tanto de las razones que lo hicieron posible, como del papel real que los colaboradores de Mies tuvieron en su desarrollo y ejecución final.
Resumo:
The translator's preface is followed by his Dissertation on the Platonic doctrine of ideas; Demonstrative syllogism; Nature of the soul; Dissertation on the true end of geometry; Life and commentaries of Proclus, including the life of Proclus by Marinus.
Resumo:
Lectures originally delivered before the Goodrich Association in Hartford.
Resumo:
Includes bibliographical references and index.
Resumo:
Vol. 2: Second edition, revised. Vol. 3: Second edition, revised and enlarged.
Resumo:
One of the curious things about this challenging book is that its ostensible subject— the Saxon medical and political scientist Hermann Conring (1606–1681)— is not mentioned in the title. Constantin Fasolt argues that we cannot know what Conring really thought or meant in his writings, which means that his topic cannot be Conring as such and must instead be that which occludes our knowledge of him, the titular limits of history. Given that we do in fact learn a good deal about Conring from Fasolt’s book, we can only hope that the decapitation of its subject will be rectified in a subsequent edition, or perhaps by the restorative work of librarians putting together subject headings. And yet Fasolt’s decision is understandable, for Conring is indeed a stalking-horse for a much bigger quarry: historiography and the historical consciousness. By “history” Fasolt understands a way of imposing intelligibility on the world, which is founded on the twin assumptions that the past is gone and unchangeable, and that the meaning of texts can be determined by placing them in their historical contexts (ix). In challenging this mode of intelligibility, Fasolt is not attempting to improve professiona history—it’s already as good as it can be—but to displace it. He regards his work as a declaration of “independence from historical consciousness” (32). At the same time, Fasolt insists that he is not simply jumping from historiography to philosophy, or attempting to preempt history with ontology (37-39). That has been tried by Nietzsche and Heidegger, who have been tainted by Nazism (Fasolt thinks unfairly). It has also been attempted by modern philosophers from Gadamer to Foucault and Charles Taylor who, in failing to address the “violence” that its mode of intelligibility does to the world, have not succeeded in outflanking history. Perhaps, Fasolt wonders, it is only the personal experience of those who have been subject to this violence—the experience of those who have been subject to historical examination—that can break the spell of history. Fasolt’s disclaimer notwithstanding, in the course of these remarks I shall argue that he is indeed jumping from history to philosophy, or attempting to outflank history by subjecting it to a particular metaphysical understanding. I shall do so in part by sketching the recent intellectual history of this move—a historical examination that I hope inflicts as little violence as possible on Fasolt’s argument.