In his paper entitled "History as critical scale: I. Ellacuría "Professor JA placed Nicholas Ellacuría thinking in relation to modernity, accepting some elements and challenges others, and in relation to the various critical paradigms that exist in contemporary philosophy. Highlight Ellacurfa undertakes a return to the actuality we noted in the previous post is shared to some extent with Heidegger. We can say almost the same as yesterday we expressed according to Professor JM Romero on the facticity in Horkheimer and Heidegger. Ellacuría obviously takes a position very close to what we pointed out that Horkheimer assumed, compared to what factual ontologization carried out by Heidegger. Nicholas says: "Ellacuría focuses its analysis of the socio-political actuality in the field and in its historical dimension and since then claims a global perspective, or as we say today, globalized for philosophical reflection. (...) But this does not lead to an abstract universal approach, but a reflection on the concrete reality of the humanity's most disadvantaged or free status of misery "(p. 72). There is thus a concrete starting point, however, points to the universal. Also, the factual approach is made in a hermeneutic-interpretive processing but with a purpose of reality (p. 72). Liberating thought moves you, obviously, an interest in the release, we noted that in previous post as an a priori that can be justified morally and epistemologically. The latter, the epistemological need be placed in the right place (the oppressed), avoids any accusation of irrationalism, since it is a dynamic of reason which seeks to understand reality (historical) (73). There is, underlying this connection between social justice and truth (p. 74) that could, I think, relate to the sympathy that the figure of the philosopher Socrates inspired basque. The truth (clarification of historical reality) part of the finding of a deficiency in the historical reality of the experience of the injustice (74). So the reason is interwoven with the practice. This kind of truth sought by the philosopher ellacuriano is not science (in the narrow sense), "but is referring to a practical dimension of truth, which may be made in connection with human liberation. Sharing that experience leads to a level of truth where theoretical reason and practical reason have not yet been divided "(p. 75). Later, Nicholas JA states: "The truth is not a thing or an outcome, but is essentially a historical task of insight and discrimination "(p. 75). It is also a truth that, in Benjamin's sense, is given in the margins and not the core of humanity. A truth that, as in the educator Paulo Freire, is revealed in the margins, among the oppressed, becoming a historical nuance in this case what has ontological nuances in the truth of "extreme situations" in Jaspers (indicated by this idea Dussel and that I have highlighted in an article about Freire). Nicholas refers to the character of fracture between the given and may manifest these places limit disclosure of a social and historical truth (75-76). But far from maintain a priori methodological Nicholas rightly indicates, there is always a priority Ellacuría reality (inherited from Zubiri matter) and therefore an experiential nature of the method for finding the truth about historical reality. Thus, it must be a certain distance between a first time experiential praxis has to be connected to a second moment of awareness. If this connection is hidden or revealed is thus a consciousness evoking Lukács would call "false" or adjusted to reality (that apprehends it, what the Hungarian Marxist acquire a dialectical form, but not so in Ellacuría) . This is how the intellectual image of reality (thought, consciousness, ideology) may be concealing (ideological) or otherwise (ideologized), as we have argued in previous posts dedicated to Ellacuría. Nicholas points out that "(...) must have a comprehensive list, in its hermeneutic sense stronger, with the subject of liberation, which according Ellacuría not be so dogmatic point once and for all and for all historical situation" ( 76). This is the first time, experiential, ellacuriano method of capturing the historical reality that must of a necessity as we have epistemological, placed in the right place (The oppressed). And then would be, "says Nicholas, a historicizing concepts. "It's about rebuilding the concepts and values \u200b\u200bin your dimension abstractly considered for integration into specific practices and the effect that in fact it actually occur" (p. 77). So, against all idealism, it is the thing (reality) to the understanding of it. The criticism launched by Ellacuría is in conjunction with the comments in the last posts of this blog, an immanent critique. But Nicolas also refers to a time of idealism in so far as it goes to a great liberator. I think that in this, and I've said in this blog I remember that thread a letter of Héctor Samour, Ellacuría ranged from pure immanence and a certain propensity most momentous and important to address primarily the issue of Human Rights, which stands as an ideal reference for all liberating process, but required to be materialized in history to acquire its full reality. Yes one thing is clear: that everything has to go through the court of history to prove its truth. It is with this conclusion and ends his speech Nicholas. Not that there's something hidden to uncover, as in Heidegger, but there is a mutual interaction and constant remodeling of truth, reality and history (p. 78). This is widely developed in the very Ellacuría last part of his seminal book: Philosophy historical reality, we still have to finish exhibit in this blog. The truth would be, says Nicholas ellacuriano synthesizing approach a task and not just an unveiling or unfolding.
References:
Senent de Frutos, JA and Mora Galiana, J. (2010). Ellacuría 20 years later. International Conference Proceedings . Seville: Andalusian Institute of Public Administration.
0 comments:
Post a Comment