Rhetorical Being: a Metaphysics of Freedom and Essence Nathan Wagner Georgia State University

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Rhetorical Being: a Metaphysics of Freedom and Essence Nathan Wagner Georgia State University View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Georgia State University Georgia State University ScholarWorks @ Georgia State University English Dissertations Department of English 4-30-2018 Rhetorical Being: A Metaphysics of Freedom and Essence Nathan Wagner Georgia State University Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.gsu.edu/english_diss Recommended Citation Wagner, Nathan, "Rhetorical Being: A Metaphysics of Freedom and Essence." Dissertation, Georgia State University, 2018. https://scholarworks.gsu.edu/english_diss/191 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Department of English at ScholarWorks @ Georgia State University. It has been accepted for inclusion in English Dissertations by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks @ Georgia State University. For more information, please contact [email protected]. RHETORICAL BEING: A METAPHYSICS OF FREEDOM AND ESSENCE by NATHAN R. WAGNER Under the Direction of Lynée Lewis Gaillet, PhD and Michael Harker, PhD ABSTRACT My dissertation examines the connection between rhetoric and being. I critique subject- oriented phenomenological assumptions that have perpetuated for decades within rhetorical theory and offer an alternative metaphysical methodology. I initially focus on Lloyd Bitzer and Richard Vatz’s debate about the rhetorical situation, which shaped accepted theories of subjectivity for decades to come. I offer an alternative model of the subject that is based on Augustine’s metaphysical model of being, and I focus on this notion of rhetorical being as a means of revealing knowledge as potentially, contextually already present through readings of Martin Heidegger and Emmanuel Levinas’s work. Augustine’s paradigm of the human being as perpetually free yet dependent on contextual surroundings for meaning, whether empirical or ephemeral, affords this study a framework through which to examine the subject within the rhetorical situation. To offer an alternative to rhetorical theories of autonomy, I argue that rhetoric precedes utterance as an original metaphysics that is connected to our being. The implications of a metaphysical rhetoric provide a future paradigm for studies in digital rhetoric, religious rhetoric, cultural rhetorics, and rhetorical activism, among others. INDEX WORDS: Rhetoric, Phenomenology, Rhetorical Situation, Metaphysics, St. Augustine RHETORICAL BEING: A METAPHYSICS OF FREEDOM AND ESSENCE by NATHAN R. WAGNER A Dissertation Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the College of Arts and Sciences Georgia State University 2018 Copyright by Nathan Russell Wagner 2018 RHETORICAL BEING: A METAPHYSICS OF FREEDOM AND ESSENCE by NATHAN R. WAGNER Committee Chair: Lynée Lewis Gaillet Michael Harker Committee: Elizabeth Lopez Electronic Version Approved: Office of Graduate Studies College of Arts and Sciences Georgia State University May2018 iv DEDICATION To L & R, always and forevermore. v ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS We do not do this thing alone. Even though the following work was composed and revised over a number of months, it represents the reflection, struggle, and scholarly pursuit over the past decade of my life. My committee members were gracious enough to guide me throughout this process and encourage my desire to “dream big.” Thank you, Michael Harker, for being a part of this project, and my doctoral career, from the very beginning. Thank you for challenging me to continually refine and shape my ideas; I have become a better scholar because of it. Thank you, Lynée Gaillet, for always believing in me, for being a consistent source of knowledge and guidance, and for presenting me with so many amazing opportunities to grow as a scholar and a teacher. You have put so much time into me, and I cannot help but be inspired by that. Thank you, Elizabeth Lopez, for stirring the idea for this dissertation in our Greek Rhetoric course. Your insights have been so constructive and valuable to me over the years, in areas within and beyond the dissertation. I want to also thank the teachers and mentors from years past that have influenced this project: Terri Nicholson, Donald Wehrs, Giovanna Summerfield, and the late James Hammersmith. Thank you to my fellow doctoral candidates; we are always in this thing together, and our friendships and conversations are incredibly important to our continued success. In no particular order: Ally Wright, John Harlow Shinholser, Simona Weik, Steven Saunders, Kristen Ruccio, Doug Hall, Charles Grimm, Ben Kolenda, Christine Anlicker, and LaRue Cook. Thank you to my parents, Brenda and Russell Wagner, for your encouragement and support throughout this process. My darlings, Leigh and Riley – I thank God every day for the blessings you are to my life. Thank you for making all of what I am possible. et quid propius auribus tuis, si cor confitens et vita ex fide est? vi TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ............................................................................................ V PREFACE .......................................................................................................................... 1 PROLOGUS ....................................................................................................................... 5 1 INTRODUCTION: WHAT IS RHETORICAL BEING?..................................... 8 1.1 Rhetorical Being: “Losing” Autonomy, Gaining the Self ........................... 10 1.2 Autonomous Perspectives in Rhetorical Theory .......................................... 16 1.2.1 The Rhetorical Situation .............................................................................. 17 1.2.2 Issues of Presence and Objectivity: Scott and Burke ................................. 22 1.3 Theoretical Alternatives: Transcending Autonomy and Presence ............. 31 1.3.1 Rickert and Vivian: Images of Being in Rhetorical Theory....................... 37 1.4 Chapter Outline .............................................................................................. 44 2 WISDOM AS THE OBSCURE OBJECT OF RHETORIC ............................... 47 2.1 Classical Intersections of Rhetoric and Being: Plato and Aristotle ........... 49 2.1.1 Plato’s Transcendent ουσία: Becoming Beyond the World .............. 50 2.1.2 Plato’s Rhetorical Realizations: Activity as Knowledge ............................. 52 2.1.3 Aristotle and the Practice of Rhetoric: Towards the Good......................... 57 2.1.4 Aristotle’s Metaphysics: Locating Essence in ενέργεια ............. 61 2.2 Augustinian Ways of Be-ing ........................................................................... 66 2.2.1 Augustine’s Rhetorical Dilemma: professio or veritas? ............................. 68 vii 2.2.2 “What then, am I, my God?” ....................................................................... 74 2.2.3 Augustinian Consensus ............................................................................... 79 3 THE RHETORIC OF BEING AMONG BEINGS .............................................. 81 3.1 Augustine’s Being in the World: The Emergence of animus ...................... 84 3.1.1 Locating animus in the Confessiones, Book 10 .......................................... 90 3.1.2 Augustinian animus in the World ............................................................... 97 3.2 Intermedium: The Heideggerian World of Transcending Presence ......... 103 3.3 Augustine’s Being-In-The-World: Phenomenological Revelations .......... 112 4 THE SIMULTANEITY OF THE AESTHETIC AND THE REAL ................ 116 4.1 Freedom in Contemporary Rhetorical Theory: Linearity and Discourse121 4.1.1 Metaphysics and Language ....................................................................... 124 4.2 Metaphysical Freedom: Defining the Substance of energeia .................... 128 4.2.1 Heideggerian Freedom: Care and Being .................................................. 130 4.3 Augustine and Freedom: The Original Condition of Being ...................... 133 4.4 Confronting Being: Levinas and Proximity ............................................... 138 4.5 The Proximal Vision of Creation: Augustine’s Ethical Relationship of Being ......................................................................................................................... 143 5 THE MANIFESTATION OF METAPHORICAL CONTINGENCY ............ 152 5.1 signa and cognitio in De Trinitate: The Case of Audience in Book 8 ........ 156 5.1.1 Augustine’s Trinitarian Ontology: The Eternal Image............................ 161 viii 5.2 Beyond the Self: Levinas, the Trace, and the Signification of Being ....... 169 5.3 Augustine’s Trinitarian Ontology: The Temporal Image ......................... 175 5.3.1 The Augustinian animus: Eternity and Temporality Unified .................. 180 5.4 conclusio: The Implications of Rhetorical Being ....................................... 182 WORKS CITED............................................................................................................ 189 1 PREFACE I came to this project after reading Augustine’s Confessiones in the Fall of 2015. I hope that I don’t sound hyperbolic when I say that this was one of the most important reading experiences of my life. I read his Confessiones because I had recently developed an interest in Christian rhetorics after researching the religious connotations of the rhetorical term kairos for a graduate class project. I began to unravel a history of religious
Recommended publications
  • Aristotelian Metaphysics: Essence and Ground
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Helsingin yliopiston digitaalinen arkisto Editorial Aristotelian Metaphysics: Essence and Ground Riin Sirkela, Tuomas Tahkob aDepartment of Philosophy, University of Vermont bDepartment of Philosophy, University of Helsinki is special issue of Studia Philosophica Estonica centers around Aristotelian metaphysics, construed broadly to cover both scholarly research on Aristo- tle’s metaphysics as well as work by contemporary metaphysicians on Aris- totelian themes. Aristotelian metaphysics is a growing tradition. ere are increasingly more metaphysicians identifying themselves as ‘Aristotelians’, and there are more scholars looking at work in contemporary metaphysics to advance scholarship. Indeed, there have already been a number of vol- umes showcasing this ‘Aristotelian turn’, including Daniel D. Novotný’s and Lukáš Novák’s Aristotelian Perspectives in Metaphysics (óþÕ¦), Edward Feser’s Aristotle on Method and Metaphysics (óþÕì), and Tuomas Tahko’s Contempo- rary Aristotelian Metaphysics (óþÕó). e contribution this special issue makes to the ongoing discussion is twofold. First, the special issue promotes a deeper interaction between schol- ars of Aristotle and contemporary metaphysicians. We hope that the pa- pers encourage people working in the history of philosophy to relate to con- temporary discussions and people working in contemporary metaphysics to engage with Aristotle and Ancient scholarship. Second, the special issue is unied in its focus on two themes in Aristotelian metaphysics, essence and grounding. e papers address questions concerning fundamentality and dependence, ontological independence or priority, the causal priority of forms, the unity of grounding, the reduction of grounding to essence, the unity of essence, the roles of essence, and explanation and denition.
    [Show full text]
  • Hendrik Lorenz/Benjamin Morison Aristotle: Metaphysics Z PHI501, Fall/Spring 2018/2019
    Hendrik Lorenz/Benjamin Morison Aristotle: Metaphysics Z PHI501, Fall/Spring 2018/2019 Aims of the course In this class, we aim to go through systematically the 17 chapters of Aristotle’s Metaphysics, book Z (sometimes called book VII), and chapter 1 of book H of the Metaphysics (the one immediately following Z), since we hold, as do many other scholars, that it is best read as a continuation of book Z. The goal is to understand Aristotle’s famous theory of ‘substance’ as presented in book Z. Substances are the central items in Aristotle’s ontology, and there are a cluster of other notions in the vicinity of ‘substance’ which we will also be trying to clarify: ‘being’, ‘account’, ‘form’, ‘this’, ‘subject’, ‘matter’, ‘essence’ or ‘being what it is’, etc. We also want to assess what kind of treatise Metaphysics Z is: its train of thought is notoriously hard to follow, with apparent digressions, or even insertions, so it might not even have been considered a unified treatise by Aristotle. There is also the question of its relation to the science of metaphysics: is it a preliminary contribution to it, or an actual exposition of (a fragment of) it? Is there even a science of metaphysics (in the sense of ‘science’ defined in the Posterior Analytics) to which it could be related? Brief list of some themes of Metaphysics Z Fall: Z1: Being is said in many ways; the central one is being as substance; so the question ‘what is being’ is the question ‘what is substance?’; Z2: Catalogue of some items which philosophers have thought count as substances;
    [Show full text]
  • God As Both Ideal and Real Being in the Aristotelian Metaphysics
    God As Both Ideal and Real Being In the Aristotelian Metaphysics Martin J. Henn St. Mary College Aristotle asserts in Metaphysics r, 1003a21ff. that "there exists a science which theorizes on Being insofar as Being, and on those attributes which belong to it in virtue of its own nature."' In order that we may discover the nature of Being Aristotle tells us that we must first recognize that the term "Being" is spoken in many ways, but always in relation to a certain unitary nature, and not homonymously (cf. Met. r, 1003a33-4). Beings share the same name "eovta," yet they are not homonyms, for their Being is one and the same, not manifold and diverse. Nor are beings synonyms, for synonymy is sameness of name among things belonging to the same genus (as, say, a man and an ox are both called "animal"), and Being is no genus. Furthermore, synonyms are things sharing a common intrinsic nature. But things are called "beings" precisely because they share a common relation to some one extrinsic nature. Thus, beings are neither homonyms nor synonyms, yet their core essence, i.e. their Being as such, is one and the same. Thus, the unitary Being of beings must rest in some unifying nature extrinsic to their respective specific essences. Aristotle's dialectical investigations into Being eventually lead us to this extrinsic nature in Book A, i.e. to God, the primary Essence beyond all specific essences. In the pre-lambda books of the Metaphysics, however, this extrinsic nature remains very much up for grabs.
    [Show full text]
  • Advancing the Aristotelian Project in Contemporary Metaphysics a Review Essay
    Philosophia Christi Vol. 21, No. 2 © 2019 Advancing the Aristotelian Project in Contemporary Metaphysics A Review Essay Robert C. Koons University of Texas at Austin Abstract: In a recent book, Substance and the Fundamentality of the Familiar, Ross Inman demonstrates the contemporary relevance of an Aristotelian approach to metaphysics and the philosophy of nature. Inman successfully applies the Aristotelian framework to a number of outstanding problems in metaphysics, philosophy of mind, and the philosophy of physics. Inman tackles some intriguing questions about the ontological status of proper parts, questions which constitute a central focus of ongoing debate and investigation. Ross D. Inman. Substance and the Fundamentality of the Familiar: A Neo- Aristotelian Mereology. New York: Routledge, 2018. 304 pages. $140.00. Ross Inman’s book is an excellent new installment in the ongoing renais- sance of Aristotelian metaphysics in analytic philosophy. Central Aristote- lian notions, such as substance, essence, causal powers, dependent parts, and matter/form combination, have reemerged in recent years, beginning with the work of Teodore Scaltsas, Peter van Inwagen, Kit Fine, David Oderberg, and Michal Rea in the 1990s.1 Te movement began to develop and fourish afer the turn of the millennium. Kit Fine, David Oderberg, Michael Loux, and E. J. Lowe built upon their own earlier work,2 while new collaborators 1. See Peter van Inwagen, “Material Beings,” Philosophy 67 (1990): 126–7; Teodore Scalt- sas, Substances and Universals in Aristotle’s Metaphysics (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1994); Kit Fine, “Tings and Teir Parts,” Midwest Studies in Philosophy 23 (1999): 61–74; David S.
    [Show full text]
  • Metaphysics of Soul and Self in Plotinus Gwenaëlle Aubry
    Metaphysics of soul and self in Plotinus Gwenaëlle Aubry To cite this version: Gwenaëlle Aubry. Metaphysics of soul and self in Plotinus. P. Remes; S. Slaveva-Griffin. The Routledge Handbook of Neoplatonism, pp.310-323, 2014. hal-02387195 HAL Id: hal-02387195 https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-02387195 Submitted on 29 Nov 2019 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. 20 Metaphysics of soul and self in Plotinus Gwenaëlle Aubry One of the great singularities of the philosophy of Plotinus consists in thinking of the self1 for its own sake and, in particular, in producing a concept of it diff erent from that of soul.2 Th is philosophical breakthrough is inseparable from the discovery of immedi- ate refl exivity, that is, the subject’s ability to apprehend itself independently of its rela- tion to an object or to another subject.3 In Plotinus, however, this refl exivity occurs only in an interrogative form, which can be read, in particular, in Enn. I.1[53] and Enn. VI.4[22]. In other words, it does not, as in Descartes, assume the form of an intuition by means of which the subject, grasping itself as consciousness, would, at the same time, have an evident revelation of its essence.
    [Show full text]
  • Jeffrey Rubard
    1 The Torso of Humanity: An Interpretation of Being and Time Preliminary Edition Jeffrey Rubard 2019 2 Contents 1. Preface 4 2. Introductions I and II 16 Division I: The Human Achievement 3. Chapter 1 37 4. Chapter 2 49 5. Chapter 3 57 6. Chapter 4 75 7. Chapter 5 85 8. Chapter 6 100 Division II: The Temporal Interpretation 9. Chapter 1 118 10. Chapter 2 128 11. Chapter 3 141 12. Chapter 4 158 13. Chapter 5 173 14. Chapter 6 185 15. Postscript 202 3 Preface Being and Time is a work by the German philosopher Martin Heidegger on the "Question of Being", published in 1927. As the centennial of the book approaches it perhaps ought to be said that as we press further into the 21st century the 'world-views' of intellectuals in the early 20th century like Heidegger's might well be expected to fade in importance in the face of the onslaught of new technologies and ‘ways of life’ which has characterized this century to date. Yet in many ways Heidegger’s first book, though its famous 'difficulty' is not much overstated, is one of the most enduring landmarks of philosophical modernity: a book which for a long time gave 'those with eyes to see and ears to hear' a new way of thinking that ignored neither the human predicament nor the shape of the cosmos. Furthermore, it almost does not need saying that the book's importance for philosophy in general exceeds the numbers of those who explicitly subscribe to its tenets.
    [Show full text]
  • Knowledge and Thought in Heidegger and Foucault: Towards an Epistemology of Ruptures Arun Anantheeswaran Iyer Marquette University
    Marquette University e-Publications@Marquette Dissertations (2009 -) Dissertations, Theses, and Professional Projects Knowledge and Thought in Heidegger and Foucault: Towards an Epistemology of Ruptures Arun Anantheeswaran Iyer Marquette University Recommended Citation Iyer, Arun Anantheeswaran, "Knowledge and Thought in Heidegger and Foucault: Towards an Epistemology of Ruptures" (2011). Dissertations (2009 -). Paper 131. http://epublications.marquette.edu/dissertations_mu/131 KNOWLEDGE AND THOUGHT IN HEIDEGGER AND FOUCAULT: TOWARDS AN EPISTEMOLOGY OF RUPTURES by Arun Iyer, B. E., M. A. A Dissertation submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School, Marquette University, in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Milwaukee, Wisconsin August 2011 ABSTRACT KNOWLEDGE AND THOUGHT IN HEIDEGGER AND FOUCAULT: TOWARDS AN EPISTEMOLOGY OF RUPTURES Arun Iyer, B.E., M.A. Marquette University, 2011 This dissertation shows how Martin Heidegger and Michel Foucault, by questioning the very understanding of the subject-object relationship on which all epistemology is grounded, challenge two of its most cherished beliefs: 1. Thought and knowledge are essentially activities on the part of the subject understood anthropologically or transcendentally. 2. The history of knowledge exhibits teleological progress towards a better and more comprehensive account of its objects. In contrast to traditional epistemology, both Heidegger and Foucault show how thought and knowledge are not just acts, which can be attributed to the subject but also events which elude any such subjective characterization. They also show us how the history of knowledge exhibits ruptures when the very character of knowledge undergoes drastic transformation in the course of history. The dissertation concludes by hinting at how these new accounts of thought and knowledge have the potential to shake the very foundations of epistemology and lead us to a new framework for discussing the most basic questions of epistemology, towards an epistemology of ruptures.
    [Show full text]
  • Plato's (Metaphysics))
    ~o v . A. Vntcrnational Library of Philosophy Studies in and ScientificMethod)C (".1 FOUNDED BY: A. J. AYER PLATO'S EDITOR: BERNARD WILLIAMS ASSISTANT EDITOR: E. R. D. HONDERICK (METAPHYSICS) INDUCTIVE PROBABILITY by John Patrick Day. ) SENSATION AND PERCEPTION: A History of the Philosophy of Perception by D. W. Hamlyn. TRACTATUS LOGICO-PHILOSOPHICUS: Ludwig Wittenstein's Logiseh- philoJrJphiseheAbhandlung with a new Translation by D. F. Pears and B. F. McGuinness and with the Introduction by Bertrand Russell. PERCEPTION AND THE PHYSICAL WORLD by D. M. Armstrong. HUME'S PHILOSOPHY OF BELIEF: A Study of his First Inquiry by Antony Flew. KANT'S THEORY OF KNOWLEDGE: An Outline of One Central Argument in the Critiqueof Pure Reasonby Graham Bird. CONDITIONS FOR DESCRIPTION by Peter Zinkernagel, translated from the Danish by Olaf Lindum. AN EXAMINATION OF PLATO'S DOCTRINES by I. M. Crombie. Two volumes. I: Plato on Man and Society. II: Plato on Knowledge and Reality. PHENOMENOLOGY OF PERCEPTION by M. Merleau-Ponty, translated from the French by Colin Smith. THE IDEA OF JUSTICE AND THE PROBLEM OF ARGUMENT by Ch. Perelman, translated from the French by John Petrie. LECTURES ON PSYCHICAL RESEARCH by C. D. Broad. Incorporating the Perrott Lectures given in Cambridge University in 1959 and 1960. THE VARIETIES OF GOODNESS by George Henrik von Wright. METHOD IN THE PHYSICAL SOENCES by G. Schlesinger. METHOD IN ETHICAL THEORY by Abraham Edel. SOENCE, PERCEPTION AND REALITY by Wilfrid Sellars. NORM AND ACTION: A Logical Enquiry by Georg Henri, von Wright. PHILOSOPHY AND SCIENTIFIC REALISM by J. J. C.Smart. STUDIES IN METAPHILOSOPHY by Morris Lazerowitz.
    [Show full text]
  • The Two Solons in Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics
    The Two Solons in Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics Studies of Aristotle’s engagement with Solon in the Nicomachean Ethics 1.10 typically focus solely on the philosophical arguments (e.g. Irwin, 1985), not questioning the sources of the relevant ideas (or seeing this as besides the point). But, if we do just this, something quite intriguing comes to light. This paper argues that Aristotle knowingly refutes the Solon of Herodotus’ Histories, distinct from the historical Solon of the extant poems, with an idea found in the very poems of Solon himself. Aristotle invokes Solon and his maxim, “look to the end” (τέλος ὁρᾶν), as a natural conclusion to the fact that man can cease to live well, i.e. lose his eudaimonia (1100a10). Eudaimonia is not merely a thing of chance nor God-given, but severe misfortune can deny eudaimonia to a man previously eudaimôn, like Priam (1099b8- 1100a9). But eudaimonia is lasting (μονίμη), so shouldn’t we wait to see that man’s life ends eudaimôn before declaring it truly so (1110a25-1100b7)? No, Aristotle argues, for, among other reasons, the stability (βεβαιότης) of virtue (ἀρετή) and its essentialness to eudaimonia enables us to declare a living man eudaimôn despite the possibility of its negation (1100b8-1101a21). It seems clear that Aristotle refers explicitly to the Herodotean Solon and not Solon himself (that they are not the same: e.g., Chiasson, 1986; Irwin, 2012). The maxim “look to the end” is found only in Herodotus’ account, and this notion of telos is substantively distinct from the telos in Solon’s poetic fragments (Chiasson, 1986).
    [Show full text]
  • 29.Philosophy of Liberation.Pdf
    CONTENTS Preface viii Chapter 1 HISTORY 1.1 Geopolitics and Philosophy 1 1.2 Philosophy of Liberation ofthe Periphery 9 Chapter 2 FROM PHENOMENOLOGY TO LIBERATION 2.1 Proximity 16 2.2 Tota1ity 21 2.3 Mediation 29 2.4 Exteriority 39 2.5 Alienation 49 2.6 Liberation 58 Chapter 3 FROM POLITICS TO ANTIFETISHISM 3.1 Politics 67 3.2 Erotics 78 3.3 Pedagogics 87 3.4 Antifetishism 95 Chapter 4 FROM NATURE TO ECONOMICS 4.1 Nature 106 4.2 Semiotics 117 4.3 Poietics 126 4.4 Economics 140 vi Chapter 5 FROM SCIENCE TO PHILOSOPHY OF LIBERATION 5.1 Science 153 5.2 Dialectic 156 5.3 The Analectical Moment 158 5.4 Practice 160 5.5 Poietics 163 5.6 Human Sciences 165 5.7 Ideological Methods 167 5.8 Critical Methods 169 5.9 Philosophy of Liberation 170 Appendix PHILOSOPHY AND PRAXIS A. Philosophy and Ideology 181 B. Dialectic between Philosophy and Praxis 183 C. Exigencies for a Philosophy of Liberation 188 D. Toward an International Division of Philosophical Labor 195 Notes 197 Glossary of Concepts 201 Glossary of Non-English Terms 213 vii PREFACE What follows is addressed to neophytes in philosophy of libera- tion. It does not claim to be an exhaustive exposition. It is a discourse that proceeds by elaborating one thesis after another, using its own categories and its own method. It is a provisional theoretical philosophical framework. Except in the Appendix, this work has few footnotes and no bibliography. Writing in the sorrow of exile (in Mexico), I did not have access to my personal library (in Argentina).
    [Show full text]
  • Rhetoric and Platonism in Fifth-Century Athens
    Trinity University Digital Commons @ Trinity Philosophy Faculty Research Philosophy Department 2014 Rhetoric and Platonism in Fifth-Century Athens Damian Caluori Trinity University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.trinity.edu/phil_faculty Part of the Philosophy Commons Repository Citation Caluori, D. (2014). Rhetoric and Platonism in fifth-century Athens. In R. C. Fowler (Ed.), Plato in the third sophistic (pp. 57-72). De Gruyter. This Contribution to Book is brought to you for free and open access by the Philosophy Department at Digital Commons @ Trinity. It has been accepted for inclusion in Philosophy Faculty Research by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @ Trinity. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Damian Caluori (Trinity University) Rhetoric and Platonism in Fifth-Century Athens There are reasons to believe that relations between Platonism and rhetoric in Athens during the fifth century CE were rather close.Z Both were major pillars of pagan cul- ture, or paideia, and thus essential elements in the defense of paganism against in- creasingly powerful and repressive Christian opponents. It is easy to imagine that, under these circumstances, paganism was closing ranks and that philosophers and orators united in their efforts to save traditional ways and values. Although there is no doubt some truth to this view, a closer look reveals that the relations be- tween philosophy and rhetoric were rather more complicated. In what follows, I will discuss these relations with a view to the Platonist school of Athens. By “the Platon- ist school of Athens” I mean the Platonist school founded by Plutarch of Athens in the late fourth century CE, and reaching a famous end under the leadership of Dam- ascius in 529.X I will first survey the evidence for the attitudes towards rhetoric pre- vailing amongst the most important Athenian Platonists of the time.
    [Show full text]
  • Alfredo Lucero-Montano Benjamin's Political Philosophy of History 1
    Internationale Walter Benjamin Gesellschaft Alfredo Lucero-Montano Benjamin’s Political Philosophy of History 1. The reflection on history seems a constant theme in Benjamin’s thought. Since his early works to his last texts, this concern constitutes the conducting thread, which grants to his diverse work an underlying unity. For Benjamin, the fundamental question seems to be how to interweave “the theory of historiography with the theory of the real course of history,” how “history itself is referred to its ‘making’—political praxis,” [Tiedemann 1983-4, 91] that is, how to generate a certain interrelationship between history and politics. This question refers us not to the nature of the historical process but to the way we acquired historical knowledge, not to historiography but to philosophy of history. Here the implicit issue is the construction of a new concept of history. Benjamin draws his concept of history through three differentiated answers: In the first phase, On Language as Such and on the Language of Man (1916) and The Task of the Translator (1923), he propounds a theological paradigm of history. Later, in The Origin of German Tragic Drama (1928), he develops, concerning history, an aesthetics paradigm. And finally, starting from 1925-1926, which marks his Marxist turn, Benjamin steadily develops a political paradigm of history, which its clearer claim is The Arcades Project (1927-1940) and the theses On the Concept of History (1940). This work only deals with Benjamin’s political paradigm, which is the synthesis of his historico-philosophical
    [Show full text]