El uso del modelo del escenario : del arte a la ciencia: Feyerabend y Merleau-Ponty

Fil: Vidal, Andrea. Universidad Nacional de La Plata. Facultad de Humanidades y Ciencias de la Educación. Instituto de Investigaciones en Humanidades y Ciencias Sociales (UNLP-CONICET); Argentina.

Alejandro Amavet y Merleau Ponty : Un diálogo interpretativo

El presente trabajo se propone realizar un análisis de la categoría teórica "cuerpo". Los libros que se examinarán para generar un diálogo entre ambos autores es el de Merleau Ponty, "Fenomenología de la percepción"; y los de Alejandro Amavet, son "Apuntes para la introducción al estudio de la Educación Física"; "Cuadernillo de Educación Física Renovada I, II y III". Lógicamente en ningún momento A. Amavet y M. Ponty se sentaron a charlar de cuestiones teóricas o a realizar análisis en base a la educación física juntos, es más el segundo de los autores mencionados es un Filosofo Francés y el primero es un licenciado en Educación Física Argentino. Ahora bien, la razón por la cual considero substancial establecer un dialogo interpretativo entre Merleau Ponty y Alejandro Amavet, es que el segundo autor mencionado toma algunas concepciones del primero para realizar análisis e interpretaciones dentro del campo disciplinar de la Educación Física más específicamente del concepto de "cuerpo"

Alejandro Amavet y Merleau Ponty : Un diálogo interpretativo

El presente trabajo se propone realizar un análisis de la categoría teórica "cuerpo". Los libros que se examinarán para generar un diálogo entre ambos autores es el de Merleau Ponty, "Fenomenología de la percepción"; y los de Alejandro Amavet, son "Apuntes para la introducción al estudio de la Educación Física"; "Cuadernillo de Educación Física Renovada I, II y III". Lógicamente en ningún momento A. Amavet y M. Ponty se sentaron a charlar de cuestiones teóricas o a realizar análisis en base a la educación física juntos, es más el segundo de los autores mencionados es un Filosofo Francés y el primero es un licenciado en Educación Física Argentino. Ahora bien, la razón por la cual considero substancial establecer un dialogo interpretativo entre Merleau Ponty y Alejandro Amavet, es que el segundo autor mencionado toma algunas concepciones del primero para realizar análisis e interpretaciones dentro del campo disciplinar de la Educación Física más específicamente del concepto de "cuerpo"

El uso del modelo del escenario : del arte a la ciencia: Feyerabend y Merleau-Ponty

Fil: Vidal, Andrea. Universidad Nacional de La Plata. Facultad de Humanidades y Ciencias de la Educación. Instituto de Investigaciones en Humanidades y Ciencias Sociales (UNLP-CONICET); Argentina.

Contingencia y ambigüedad en la filosofía de Maurice Merleau-Ponty. Fenomenología, ontología, arte, política

Este trabajo intenta mostrar cómo la reflexión de Merleau-Ponty se constituye en un ejemplo que corrobora la ambigüedad y la contingencia que el filósofo le atribuye a la realidad y a sus expresiones. Se analizarán cada uno de los planos en que el autor desarrolla su pensamiento y en los que se manifiestan tal ambigüedad y contingencia: el fenomenológico, el ontológico, el artístico y el político. Una consideración común a toda su obra, es la ruptura con los antagonismos originados en la oposición sujeto-objeto moderna: realismo-idealismo; mundo-conciencia; sensibilidad-pensamiento. La percepción abre los horizontes sobre los que se instala el saber; pero el mundo que "hay" se presenta, en la filosofía merleaupontiana, como infinitamente explorable.

Corporeal generosity: On giving with Nietzsche, Merleau-Ponty, and Levinas (Book review)

Book review of Rosalyn Diprose, Corporeal Generosity: On Giving with Nietzsche, Merleau-Ponty, and Levinas (State University of New York Press) Albany, 2002.

Merleau-Ponty: uma ontologia do visível

This work discusses the ontology of the visible at the thought of Maurice Merleau-Ponty (1908-1961), which points to a depth and opacity of the perceived world that oppose transparency of geometric world thought by René Descartes (1596-1650). At first we approached the Cartesian discourse developed in Dioptrics Descartes, the first of three scientific discourses published in 1637, being introduced by the famous Discourse method. In this sense, this research discusses the mechanistic explanation that the modern philosopher has the vision, process comprising the formation of images on the retina and its communication to the brain, and the subsequent reading performed by an immaterial mind. Discusses the notion of image as a result of the interpretation of the spirit because, for Descartes, is not the eye that sees, but the spirit that reads and decodes the signals that the body receives the world. At another point, reflected on the criticism of the philosopher Maurice Merleau-Ponty at the thought of overflight present in Dioptrics Descartes. Therefore, it takes as its reference the third part of the book The Eye and the Spirit (1961), in which the intellectualist approach of vision is considered a failed attempt to move away from the visible to rebuild it from anywhere . In this sense, it reflects on a new ontology proposed by Merleau-Ponty thinking being without departing from the puzzles of the body and vision. Puzzles that show a promiscuity between the seer and the seen, between sentient and sensitive. Thus, this paper discusses how visibility was treated by the contemporary philosopher, not as something to be judged by the spirit to get a real nature of things, but as a manifestation of the same things. Finally, this research explores the ontology of the visible in merleaupontiano thought, an ontology that does not rebuild or appropriates visible by a thought of overflight, but what you do from your own visibility as compared original and constant with depth in the world.

Merleau-Ponty: uma ontologia do visível

This work discusses the ontology of the visible at the thought of Maurice Merleau-Ponty (1908-1961), which points to a depth and opacity of the perceived world that oppose transparency of geometric world thought by René Descartes (1596-1650). At first we approached the Cartesian discourse developed in Dioptrics Descartes, the first of three scientific discourses published in 1637, being introduced by the famous Discourse method. In this sense, this research discusses the mechanistic explanation that the modern philosopher has the vision, process comprising the formation of images on the retina and its communication to the brain, and the subsequent reading performed by an immaterial mind. Discusses the notion of image as a result of the interpretation of the spirit because, for Descartes, is not the eye that sees, but the spirit that reads and decodes the signals that the body receives the world. At another point, reflected on the criticism of the philosopher Maurice Merleau-Ponty at the thought of overflight present in Dioptrics Descartes. Therefore, it takes as its reference the third part of the book The Eye and the Spirit (1961), in which the intellectualist approach of vision is considered a failed attempt to move away from the visible to rebuild it from anywhere . In this sense, it reflects on a new ontology proposed by Merleau-Ponty thinking being without departing from the puzzles of the body and vision. Puzzles that show a promiscuity between the seer and the seen, between sentient and sensitive. Thus, this paper discusses how visibility was treated by the contemporary philosopher, not as something to be judged by the spirit to get a real nature of things, but as a manifestation of the same things. Finally, this research explores the ontology of the visible in merleaupontiano thought, an ontology that does not rebuild or appropriates visible by a thought of overflight, but what you do from your own visibility as compared original and constant with depth in the world.