Publication: Mesa III.-¿Salvar a la subjetividad?
Authors
Gercman, Beatriz L.
item.page.secondaryauthor
Universidad de Murcia
item.page.director
Publisher
publication.page.editor
publication.page.department
DOI
item.page.type
info:eu-repo/semantics/other
Description
Abstract
RESUMEN
Arendt salva en un sentido a la subjetividad de ser pensada a partir de la falta que la constituye y de la ley
que impide el unísono de voluntades. Su noción de ‘sujeto’ sería ambigua, pues solo parece poder pensarse en
sentido de un pleno. Y parece querer salvar a la subjetividad de su repliegue interno, producto de una ley que es
primera y constitutiva. Arendt sigue la vía del sentido común apartando la vista de una subjetividad que -
desdoblada en relación a sí misma- encuentra su ser-en-común-con-otros en esa apertura que barra la
posibilidad de alcanzar la completud del objeto que falta al mismo tiempo que empuja a buscarla. Heller transita
también el campo de una subjetividad radicada en la comunicación intersubjetiva. Pero aún así, salvan a la
subjetividad –sin poner su centro en el yo- pueden cuestionar lo que la lesiona.
ABSTRACT In a sense, Arendt saves subjectivity from being thought from both the lack that constitutes it and the law that prevents the unison of a will. Her notion of “subject” would be ambiguous, since it only seems to be able of being thought in the sense of a plenitude. So subjectivity seems to be saved from its internal doubling that is effect of a first and constitutive law. Arendt goes for the way of common sense without looking at a subjectivity that only finds its being-in-common-with-others in the aperture that limits the possibility of reaching the lacking plenitude of the object at the same time as it pushes to go for this plenitude. In the same way, Heller develops the topic of a subjectivity rooted in the intersubjective communication. If Arendt and Heller look after the subjectivity without putting the I in its middle, they both can question what injures that same subjectivity.
ABSTRACT In a sense, Arendt saves subjectivity from being thought from both the lack that constitutes it and the law that prevents the unison of a will. Her notion of “subject” would be ambiguous, since it only seems to be able of being thought in the sense of a plenitude. So subjectivity seems to be saved from its internal doubling that is effect of a first and constitutive law. Arendt goes for the way of common sense without looking at a subjectivity that only finds its being-in-common-with-others in the aperture that limits the possibility of reaching the lacking plenitude of the object at the same time as it pushes to go for this plenitude. In the same way, Heller develops the topic of a subjectivity rooted in the intersubjective communication. If Arendt and Heller look after the subjectivity without putting the I in its middle, they both can question what injures that same subjectivity.
publication.page.subject
Citation
item.page.embargo
Ir a Estadísticas
Este ítem está sujeto a una licencia Creative Commons. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/