Professor Héctor Samour points in his presentation of an International Congress dedicated to Ellacuría in Seville in 2010 ellacuriana conception of history enables critical thinking and release that corrects what is attributed to the traditional philosophies of history. Criticism of the philosophy of history, he says, are linked to the questioning Cartesian cogito with its supposedly privileged view of all (pp. 43-44). Thus, recelaría overview of all insofar as it implies a neglect of the singular concrete man is dissolved in the facticity of a world of life just keeps getting an outside perspective on reality. It calls therefore, for the actual history, this real and the contingent of all thinking. In these postmodern type currents ranging from Nietzschean vitalism, to Heidegger's phenomenology, hermeneutics (Gadamer) or the neo-pragmatism (Rorty). The disadvantage, however, Samour said that we attribute to these critical currents in all strong conception of history (philosophy of history) to substantiate an enlightened emancipation in a sense, is that, precisely, clearly can not support a project liberating. Although Samour supports, of course, nobody discusses some shortcomings in the original Enlightenment project (formalism that conceals a material bias in universal thought, as we mentioned in previous post).
face of these extremes (strong currency postmodernism and the philosophy of history) does exist the possibility of a duty might make of standards in the analysis we take the story, but in a way that would be acceptable: "The philosopher of history can no longer devote today to make predictions about the future, but neither should cease their estimated valuations about it, can not announce what will be, but it does suggest how should be or, in any case, how should not ever be "(p. 45). This is excellently fulfilled, rightly points out, the philosophy of historical reality Ellacuría. Recall that a concept is open at all teleological history, without corsets metaphysical, because the story is a complex structure and dynamics, very plural, moving ahead, shall we say, all thought of it (again Zubiri realism). There is a set of options that will unleash dynamics aiming at the historic structures. The story is in this sense, a limited primary practice and enabled at the same time, As that is material and structural. So the story is praxis and structure. Nothing more. This implies a clear denial by Ellacuría of any future mythology or ideology of progress upward and metaphysical elements typical of idealistic conceptions and materialistic conceptions present (certain Marxism, for example).
I am very interested to note that the ellacuriano approach leads to a critique of Heidegger. Quoting Professor Samour: "Based on this concept [of historical reality] Ellacuría can also criticize Heidegger who reduces historical dynamism to the existential dimension of Dasein , a sense that you need to understand. History is not transmitted primarily senses, but ways to stay in reality and possibilities of life, which is based either direction. Certainly it is important to inquire about the meaning of human actions and historical. But the important thing is to understand that the meaning is rooted in reality and not vice versa. The system of broadcast possibilities tradition is not meaningless, but actually in a position, real time real-life individuals and groups "(pp. 46-47).
Also, as mentioned in previous posts, the story is likely that appropriate, no potential to flourish. The potentials do not change ever. What does mark the course of history are different capacities and capabilities to be possessed. There is, therefore, a replica of the biological evolution to the plane of history, which corroborates to what extent, I understand the appeal to biology by Ellacuría does not involve biological reductionism. Nor is the history or maturation or unveiling (p. 47). Prevails, thus opening up the future with no preset scripts in the historical development, and this does influence a look that caters to the biological, there is an essential plurality in history: "Since the subject of history in ellacuriana vision is the human species, any possible only appeal to a transcendent ontological subject and opens therefore the possibility of multiplying the issues (gender, culture, education, ethnicity, identity, environment, sexual identity) and the subjects of liberating political action (...) "( p. 48). And similarly refuses, so I think that answers many of the postmodern critiques mentioned above, every point of vantage point and external abstract and absolute sense of right and off target. However this does not preclude the development, as opposed to postmodern philosophy, a critical and emancipatory project we have described in previous posts and that will resume next the hand of this scholar and disciple of Ellacuría.
0 comments:
Post a Comment