By contrast, the hermeneutic sociology of knowledge strives to resist the tendency to simplify social reality by macro-sociological explanations, without recognizing they are always treated thickness or intensionality meaning, and not just sense assumptions, and examining their collective effects.
http://www.zonar.tv/reciclaje/artes/netart2.htm
http://www.espiraldialectica.com.ar/POSMO2.htm
http:// www.64928.com/rizoma/html/enlaces.html
http://www.iade.org.ar/iade/Dossiers/imperio/5.2.html
http://www.nossa.unal.edu.co/biblos/Rizomacap1.doc
http://www.henciclopedia.org.uy/autores/Beltramelli/Nombrepropio.htm
http://www.javeriana.edu.co/relato_digital/r_digital/bibliografia/teoriag_art.htm
http://hackitectura.net/wiki/phpwiki-1.3.3/index.php/Glosario%20conceptos%20biopolitcos%20en%20hipertexto
http://www.javeriana.edu.co/Facultades/C_Sociales/Facultad/sociales_virtual/
publicaciones/hipertxt-lit/apendice/convergencia.htm
http://dialogica.com.ar/clicsmodernos/archives/2003/09/5_que_es_un_hip.html
http://sunwc.cepade.es/ ~ jrivera / bases_teor / cognition_science / rizoma.htm
http://dialogica.com.ar/clicsmodernos/archives/hipertexto/
http://www.nossa. unal.edu.co/biblos/Rizomacap1.doc
http://perso.wanadoo.es/garoza/G4Brown.htm
http://www.jstk.org/txt/espacios.html
E n this book, rhizome each fragment can be read anywhere and get in touch with any other: a book, according to Deleuze and Guattari, "refuses to logos, the transcendence of the idea, prior to the concept, the court of reason, officials of thought, the subject legislator. " As a book-rhizome meets six conditions:
· C onnect any point with any other point.
· C ach of its features does not necessarily refer to features of the same nature (no need for a coherent unit, but rather promotes heterogeneity).
· M multiples, brings into play very different regimes of signs, not made of units dimensions but has no beginning or end.
· E stablish significant breaks.
· E s map, is made of lines of flight, ie not filiables, as in a tree view.
· ontrary C mimics the parameters, the rhizome is related to the map to be produced where detachable, connectable, alterable. No response to structural models or generic not converge, but is an acentric model. It does not require recognition of structures or meanings or origins or intentions.
+ + +
E stas characteristics are perfectly comparable to hypertext and its psychodynamic practice. The rhizome, is therefore very timely to be an image to represent the hypertext . Intersection points of similar speeches in various fields (bodies, geographical areas, images, messages, etc.) where the same intention fragmentary and ahistorical. It is an unorganized point distribution in a visible pattern. Rhizome
= distribution circuits. Horizontal, underground stem, such as the lily. For Deleuze and Guattari, there are three types of book: the book-tree, which follow a binary logic, the rootlet system of multiple roots and the rhizome-book, consisting of plateaus (fragments) autonomous, provided by "microcracks".
Power is not the content of a corpus, is not itself. It's organic, it is not invariable. Is multidirectional. Circulating energy is available on networks and therefore has no monolithic holder devices, circuits, and aces of relationships. There is no center. Just off center and discontinuity.
oucault F gives us a toolbox for eventualizar failures; evidence to give rise to a singularity. We examined, therefore, the power relations that form the causal universality gearing to analyze the discursive formations of this subject polyhedron integrity. And internally decompose processes (real games) revealing Transformation-Technique-of-Empire-of-the-Normal. Standardized technical repression and Individuals. Similarly, Barthes is concerned with distributive and integrative relationships. Normalize if segmentarity as a modern form of slavery.
Consequently, no originality, but regularly. Breaks and ruptures. We are interested in the interstices, as they highlight the strata spanning isotopies. Therefore, what sustains it, ultimately, the power is that it induces productive things. Production occurs. Produce records. Pleasure. And it produces discourse deeply rooted in molecular topoi.
Lucretius, Spinoza and Nietzsche point out the no risk in the regions in which epistemological thinking adventure. Marx claims that the capital is based on the ownership of the means of production and the origin of private property is the existence of private property, its consequence, the dehumanization and alienation from work or risk losing the essence being it objectifies. The work should release it, it dominates.
breaking Freud notes the Placer / Reality, then highlight the existence of a logic that is unconscious conscious, but finally operational (consciously made without our will.) For him the unconscious desire and rationality establishes the way we ordered (and hierarchical) certain cultural purposes given certain social media, that require us to delay his pursuit of pleasure and tolerate frustration. We speak, of reasonableness and rationality.
During the eighteenth century positivism so accentuates particular correspondence to the objects. A = A. Given truth. Adequatio. Model in which the analogical relation between the mental state is a mandatory relationship expressed in language. There is no moral reason but episteme, meaning that the order is established and meets a social classification from certain forms of knowledge and social discourse, determining a border (limes), which allows you to sort out who is the episteme as transgress the norms of that.
will see that the violation referred to has the ability to provide themselves reflective surface that allows us to stir the logos will call a fissure obliquity (Loxos).
errors "or presentation of the subject building ling ¨ 'stico?
Everything is interpretation. The truth is a fact interpreted. Consensus of the subjects to validate the correspondence, no less interested.
But this truth is: stated or given, is it free ability to propose a truth contrary to nature fun / educational or pleasant / ideological?.
Given this scenario is a delight to create a reflective surface and inquire about the need for truth. Do we need the truth?, How is it defined?, "Unity or diversity phenomenal sense?," Matching criteria for deep or not it, Is not deep or ideology of the media?
For Ardent, the truth is a factual data, individual process in the construction of the truth rather than evidence and apodictic principles. The correspondence is only a means, since the truth is in the word (Reduction Principle). We put
therefore our efforts on representation of the facts from the universe language. To do this we must take care of floating elements and the selected method of perception imposes conditions, conditions that are arbitrary to the point of deciding itself.
Thus, each agency imposes conditions of perception and accept that the method limits the object, the subject decide the method. In this sense, the task is twofold, because we resiginificar and disidentify conception of what we take for real. If truth is argumentative, the real will perspective.
Each subject has only his own faithfulness to the point of view. [1] The subject is a unity of truth that is historically and has a feature that particularized as such. This diversity is understood as the ability of subjects designed and pursued an aesthetic of existence.
At the risk of falling into an ontology of the present. Our goal is to place the subject language as it is something that allows us to justify the difference in the obliquity operate, and streamline what allows the subject to legitimize the distinct and different to fly as a hermeneutic unit, a unit that is different because it will become real.
Phaedrus in the hands of Derrida
Plato is the difference between writing in the water and write to the soul. Seduction becomes threatening, since it is an act or transaction that takes place at the same vertex which converges to the clause of knowledge and the dissemination of meaning.
is not that what you see, since the description is not discovery. Patrimonial space is created as part circumscribes and records a certain pecuneo called Cargo / Power. This is to say what transgresses, it is what brand and reaffirms the difference.
"The difference in structure between the absolutely natural language (to be distinguished from natural language) and language quite artificial remains unwavering. And the language called natural, made of words and names is based on the arbitrariness of the sign will never be natural, with the naturalness of the cry or laugh that passes, according to Descartes, all national boundaries ... both peasants and philosophers ... speak natural language. Are therefore at least as responsive ... " [2]
accepted that language is an intermediate state between men and modernity. But writing is held for tricks and charms that are geared towards purification. Pharmakon with pharmakeus (magician, sorcerer, or a prisoner) and pharmakos (scapegoat) denote the notion of poison and remedy, cure and infect the body necessarily sick body to identify the wrong track and trace the border (limes) that circumscribes the inside and outside door. That fun masks
diversification and, therefore, movement, location and game (difference) typically concealed and covertly fierce. Therefore provides the appropriate conditions for operating an intricate network of denunciations and renunciations that perform control, redistribution of selection and censorship. And therefore, power to prohibit.
So how legitimates and controls the power?, "Domination or discursive legitimacy? The legitimacy of the use is defined as domination. The power is expressed in the verb, not noun. The power is expressed in action, and not how it is defined. And legitimacy is a non-logical explanation to justify a particular institution and cultural norms that confer normative categories to its imperatives.
+++++++ How does this Edge / Limit / passage?
The separate existence between personality / nature (acquired / innate) is the product of the personality that acts on its own, hence the bias to understand writing as a derivation (attached and constrained), mechanical design of the inflation since inflation language is the sign itself.
+++++++++ What is the place where the experience occurs?, "There that region beyond the metaphysical to withstand the pressure of the logos? ...
remember that: "The original meaning of Logos is, as Heidegger said, read, ie, collect, gather 'Lese' harvest, harvest. " [3] Logos as the source of the truth in a alocutorio.
addition, "logocentrism is the other name of Greek metaphysics and verbal regulation of property." [4]
The idea of \u200b\u200bscience and writing make sense to us only from one source and within a world which have already been assigned to a percent sign concept. The writing is what makes science the condition of possibility of ideal objects. "The determination of being as presence is virtually the matrix to Derrida history of metaphysics. " [5]
Metaphysics of phonetic writing, the most original and powerful ethnocentrism (...) in one and the same order directs: The concept of writing, (...) the history of metaphysics, (...) and the concept of science or scientific nature of science. " [6]
To avoid any form of thought which can be categorized of anti-non-expected initial argument, we utter the incantation out loud: Shake Loxos the logos with Lockheed.
In closing, we can only set out our concerns: How tympanitic philosophical ear? How toppling or sliding?, How persuasion is achieved if no ID?, "Let yourself be encoded by the philosophical logos or working on the logos Loxos?. E interpret why, since then, history has become history of truth. ++++++++
Notes
[2] Derrida, J., "Language and philosophical institutions ", Ed, 1995, p. 82.
[3] Gadamer, H., "The hermeneutic turn", Ed Chair, Madrid, p. 98.
[4] Sollers, P., in the introduction to Derrida., J., "Of Grammatology", Ed Twenty First Century, Madrid, 1998, p. ix.
[5] Gadamer, H., "The hermeneutic turn", Ed Chair, Madrid, p. 87.
[6] Derrida., J., "Of Grammatology", Ed twenty-first century Madrid, 1998, pp. 7-8.
0 comments:
Post a Comment