Academic literature on the topic 'Jürgen (1926-....)'
Create a spot-on reference in APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard, and other styles
Consult the lists of relevant articles, books, theses, conference reports, and other scholarly sources on the topic 'Jürgen (1926-....).'
Next to every source in the list of references, there is an 'Add to bibliography' button. Press on it, and we will generate automatically the bibliographic reference to the chosen work in the citation style you need: APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, Vancouver, etc.
You can also download the full text of the academic publication as pdf and read online its abstract whenever available in the metadata.
Journal articles on the topic "Jürgen (1926-....)"
1
Barrozo, Victor Breno Farias. "ENTRE O PLURALISMO E O DIÁLOGO INTER-RELIGIOSO:." Pax Domini 2, no. 2 (July 26, 2018): 73–91. http://dx.doi.org/10.32808/paxdomini.v2i2.11.
Full textAbstract:
O presente artigo propõe-se discutir panoramicamente sobre a problemática do diálogo inter-religioso, no contexto da situação pluralista das religiões na sociedade contemporânea, tomando como perspectiva contributiva à abordagem do teólogo alemão Jürgen Moltmann (1926). Para tanto, traçaremos panoramicamente o lugar, as perspectivas e as direções que constituem a chamada “teologia cristã das religiões” ou “teologia do pluralismo religioso”. Em seguida, apresentaremos de uma forma em geral, como se está posta a discussão sobre os eixos e formas do diálogo inter-religioso na reflexão da teologia das religiões. E por fim, desenvolveremos alguns apontamentos a respeito de tal questão, a partir da leitura tópica dos livros A Igreja no Poder do Espírito (1975) e Experiências de reflexão teológica (1999), em busca de elementos introdutórios para uma sinalização do prisma protestante acerca do diálogo entre o cristianismo e as religiões no mundo atual.
2
Duval, Noël, and Paul-Albert Février. "Jürgen Christern (1928-1983)." Antiquités africaines 21, no. 1 (1985): 7–14. http://dx.doi.org/10.3406/antaf.1985.1107.
Full text
3
Torlegård, Kennert. "Jürgen Hothmer 1924–1991." ISPRS Journal of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing 46, no. 5 (October 1991): iii—iv. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0924-2716(91)90042-t.
Full text
4
Hirschfeld, Gerhard. "Jürgen Rohwer, 1924 - 2015." WLBforum 17, no. 2 (October 15, 2015): 43–44. http://dx.doi.org/10.53458/wlbf.v17i2.196.
Full text
5
Mormann, Thomas. "Moritz Schlick, Kritische Gesamtausgabe, herausgegeben von Friedrich Stadler und Hans-Jürgen Wendel: Die Wiener Zeit. Aufsätze, Beiträge Rezensionen 1926–1936, Abteilung I, Band 6 (herausgegeben und eingeleitet von Johannes Friedl und Heiner Rutte)." Journal for General Philosophy of Science 40, no. 1 (July 2009): 155–60. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10838-009-9079-z.
Full text
6
Hendrickson, Alan, and Elaine Hendrickson. "Hans Jürgen Eysenck (1916–1997)." Trends in Cognitive Sciences 1, no. 8 (November 1997): 287–88. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/s1364-6613(97)01098-x.
Full text
7
Vostrowsky, Otto. "Hans-Jürgen Bestmann (1925-2005)." Nachrichten aus der Chemie 53, no. 9 (September 2005): 941. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/nadc.20050530930.
Full text
8
Fernández-Ballesteros, R., and F. Silva. "Obituary: Hans-Jürgen Eysenck (1916-1997)." European Journal of Psychological Assessment 14, no. 1 (January 1998): 94. http://dx.doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759.14.1.94.
Full text
9
Paulus, W. "In memoriam Jürgen Peiffer (1922 2006)." Clinical Neuropathology 26, no. 09 (September 1, 2007): 241–44. http://dx.doi.org/10.5414/npp26241.
Full text
10
Bleyer, U., and H. H. von Borzeszkowski. "Obituary: Hans-Jürgen Treder, 1928–2006." Annalen der Physik 16, no. 4 (April 3, 2007): 235–36. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/andp.200710239.
Full textDissertations / Theses on the topic "Jürgen (1926-....)"
1
Reaidy, Joubran. "Trinité et création à partir de la pensée de Jürgen Moltmann." Strasbourg 2, 2004. http://www.theses.fr/2004STR20079.
Full textAbstract:
Ce travail se donne pour objectif de méditer la communion entre l’humanité et la création fondée sur la communion trinitaire vivante. La vie trinitaire est une passion relationnelle éternelle qui se vit communautairement et se donne en se révélant au cœur de la structure communautaire e l’Univers. Devant toute la violence que l’homme pratique contre la nature vivante et qui modifie le rapport entre lui et l’ensemble de la création, l’humanité est invitée aujourd’hui à vivre la réconciliation avec la création tout entière. Rien ne peut être vrai et effectif hors de la vérité comprise comme relation et communion. Et toute communion relationnelle ne devient effective que dans le « se donner soi-même » à l’autre. Vivre cette passion communautaire « avec », « dans » et « pour » la création tout entière qui vit en Dieu, c’est éprouver incessamment la vérité de la vie divine au cœur de notre souffrance et notre jouissanceThe goal of this work consists in meditating on the question of the communion between humanity and creation based on the living communion of Trinity. Life of Trinity is an eternal relational passion lived with a great solidarity with the community of creation. In front of ecological problems, humanity is invited today to live reconciliation with creation. Nothing can be true and effective out of the truth which is defined as relation and communion. The relational communion becomes effective only in giving oneself to other. To live this passion “with”, “in” and “for” creation is nothing other than living divine truth in the heart of our suffering and our pleasure
2
Casanova, Brito Mauricio. "Razón y normatividad. El debate entre Jürgen Habermas y Niklas Luhmann." Tesis, Universidad de Chilet, 2014. http://www.repositorio.uchile.cl/handle/2250/117188.
Full textAbstract:
Tesis para optar al grado de Magíster en Filosofía mención EpistemologíaLa controversia entre JürgenHabermas y NiklasLuhmann estuvo vigente durante aproximadamente tres décadas. El punto de inicio fue una obra conjunta publicada en 1971 (Teoría de la sociedad o tecnología social). El desenlace, el fallecimiento de Luhmann en 1998. Durante este periodo, la obra de ambos autores se mantuvo en constante diálogo, adquiriendo la relevancia de debates tan recurridos como el efectuado entre Karl Popper y Theodor Adorno. En esta investigación pretendemos mostrar que esta controversia (inserta en el contexto no tanto de la filosofía sino de las ciencias sociales) no es ajena al pensamiento filosófico, sino que representa una instancia de renovación de las principales ideas filosóficas en torno a la modernidad, inauguradas por Kant y Hegel. Nuestra postura es que en Habermas y Luhmann se confrontan dos posibilidades de iniciar el pensamiento filosófico y teórico, como algo apriorístico o como un resultado.
3
Mello, Júnior Alexandre de Freitas de. "Epistemologia moral : a argumentação de Putnam acerca da objetividade dos valores." reponame:Repositório Institucional da UnB, 2014. http://repositorio.unb.br/handle/10482/17589.
Full textAbstract:
Dissertação (mestrado)—Universidade de Brasília, Instituto de Ciências Humanas, Departamento de Filosofia, Programa de Pós-Graduação em Filosofia, 2014.Submitted by Albânia Cézar de Melo (albania@bce.unb.br) on 2015-01-30T11:50:33Z No. of bitstreams: 1 2014_AlexandreFreitasMelloJunior.pdf: 990645 bytes, checksum: e32ca247b491414fc6308d333947c403 (MD5)
Approved for entry into archive by Ruthléa Nascimento(ruthleanascimento@bce.unb.br) on 2015-02-10T20:02:38Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 2014_AlexandreFreitasMelloJunior.pdf: 990645 bytes, checksum: e32ca247b491414fc6308d333947c403 (MD5)
Made available in DSpace on 2015-02-10T20:02:38Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 2014_AlexandreFreitasMelloJunior.pdf: 990645 bytes, checksum: e32ca247b491414fc6308d333947c403 (MD5)
A presente dissertação expõe o périplo percorrido por Putnam com o escopo de argumentar que a dicotomia fato/valor está fundamentada em noções errôneas dos conceitos nela envolvidos. A dicotomia, assim constituída, é o sustentáculo de um equívoco segundo o qual enunciados de valor, em especial enunciados éticos, não podem ser objetivos. Postulamos que enunciados éticos podem ser objetivos, mas para isso alguns conceitos centrais devem ser reformulados. Desse modo, é tematizado no primeiro capítulo o que são enunciados cognitivamente relevantes, na perspectiva do positivismo lógico, pois é a partir desse registro filosófico que Putnam reage às conclusões de que enunciados éticos não são objetivos. No segundo capítulo, analisa-se a noção de fato do positivismo lógico inspirada no empirismo britânico, apresentando uma rejeição dessa noção, quando considerada nesses termos. É lançada, também, uma crítica ao realismo da metafísica tradicional, fator esse fundante para o procedimento que Putnam irá realizar favoravelmente ao imbricamento entre as noções de ‘fato’ e ‘valor’. ‘Fato’ e ‘valor’ estão intimamente relacionados, de tal forma que é impossível imaginar uma questão de fato que não contenha uma valoração qualquer e, a fim de demonstrar isso, abordamos a noção de ‘conceitos éticos espessos’. No terceiro capítulo, é apresentada a primeira rodada do debate entre Putnam e Habermas, na qual a posição daquele está em evidência. Putnam faz considerações sobre a distinção habermasiana entre ‘valor’ e ‘norma’. Habermas responde, e dá um panorama da filosofia de Putnam. Este realiza uma tréplica, esclarecendo pontos em que julga que Habermas enganou-se. No quarto e último capítulo, procuramos, por fim, explicar o que é o realismo pragmatista de Putnam, conhecido por realismo interno, dando uma fundamentação teórica a noção de objetividade que é condição necessária para se estabelecer a relevância cognitiva dos enunciados éticos. Para falarmos do realismo pragmatista, invocamos a ‘relatividade conceitual’ e o ‘esquema conceitual’, haja vista serem fulcrais para o seu entendimento. ________________________________________________________________________ ABSTRACT
This dissertation presents the journey traveled by Putnam with the scope to argue that the fact/ value dichotomy is based on misconceptions of the concepts involved. The dichotomy, thus constituted, is the basis of a misconception according to which statements of value, particularly ethical statements, cannot be objective. We postulate that ethical statements can be objective, but for that, some core concepts must be reformulated. Thus, the first chapter presents what cognitively relevant statements are, from the perspective of logical positivism, as it is from this philosophical record that Putnam reacts to the conclusions that ethical statements are not objective. The second chapter examines the logical positivism’s notion of fact, actually inspired by British empiricism, to present a rejection of this notion, when considered in these terms. It also launched a critique of the realism of traditional metaphysics, which is a foundational factor for Putnam’s procedure favorably to the entanglement between the notions of 'fact' and 'value'. 'Fact' and 'value' are closely related, so it is impossible to imagine a matter of fact that does not contain a valuation and, in order to demonstrate this, we discuss the notion of ‘thick ethical concepts'. In the third chapter, the first round of debates between Putnam and Habermas is presented, in which Putnam’s position is in focus. Putnam makes consideration of Habermas' distinction between 'value' and 'norm'. Habermas responds, and gives an overview of Putnam’s philosophy. Then, Putnam performs a rejoinder to clarify points in which he believes Habermas was mistaken. In the fourth and final chapter, we finally try to explain what Putnam’s pragmatic realism is, also known as internal realism, by giving a theoretical basis for the notion of objectivity, necessary condition to establish the cognitive relevance of ethical statements. In order to talk about pragmatic realism, we call down the 'conceptual relativity' and the 'conceptual scheme', considering they are central for it to be understood.
4
Zouaoui, Rachid. "Ethique, droit et politique chez Jürgen Habermas." Aix-Marseille 1, 2009. http://www.theses.fr/2009AIX10120.
Full textAbstract:
Dans "Droit et démocratie" (1997), Habermas procède à une reconstruction du système des droits et de la démocratie. Il démontre la co-originarité de l'autonomie privée et de l'autonomie publique et parvient à résorber la tension entre droits de l'homme et souveraineté populaire. Ce travail se propose de restituer les différents moments de ce paradigme procédural tout en montrant qu'il ne peut fonctionner sans le secours d'une théorie de l'agir communicationnel. La première partie entreprend de dégager les présupposés anthropologique et pragmatique de la démocratie délibérative habermassienne qui déterminent l'orientation de toute vie civique possible et fondent de façon décisive le type d'appartenance d'un individu à sa communauté. La seconde partie est consacrée aux rapports qu'entretiennent institutions juridiques et démocratie délibérative. Le droit moderne, réinterprété à la lumière de l'Ethique de la discussion, constitue la garantie de légitimité dont une démocratie moderne a besoin. Ce nouveau modèle a toutefois des limites : il semble évacuer la question de la rationalité pratique et décharger les citoyens de toute responsabilité. La troisième partie présente l'articulation concrète de morale, droit et démocratie. Pour rendre compte de cette citoyenneté en acte, je développe l'idée d'autonomie sociale, synthèse de l'autonomie privée et de l'autonomie publique. Elle se constituerait autour d'un noyau substantiel, une théorie de l'agir communicationnel. La quatrième et dernière partie aborde la question d'une citioyenneté postnationale et de la possibilité d'établissement d'un lien civique à un âge postnational.
5
Lambret, Marc. "Habermas lecteur de Weber et la question du fondement des valeurs." Paris 4, 1997. http://www.theses.fr/1997PA040137.
Full textAbstract:
Jurgen Habermas, avec son "éthique de discussion", est aujourd'hui une référence pour ceux qui veulent fonder une morale laïque unifiée. A ce projet, l'idée du "nouveau polythéisme" des valeurs, formulée par Max Weber en son temps, semble s'opposer directement. C'est pourtant chez Weber que Habermas trouve l'inspiration pour interpréter la modernisation occidentale comme le déploiement des ressources de la raison, en particulier de sa compétence pour la résolution des questions morales. Mais l'analyse précise du texte habermassien montre que l'idée de rationalité morale-pratique est contre-productive, et que Weber donne surtout à comprendre de la modernité sans religion le paradoxe d'un rationalisme déraisonnable. L'idée de la modernité comme âge du dépassement définitif de la religion vient de la foi au christ Jésus, qui se réalise dans ce qui demeure une religion; sans la foi au christ cette idée se retrouve sans fondement ni perspective. Quant à l'idée que les hommes peuvent et doivent communiquer pour s'entendre raisonnablement sur les questions morales, et sur ce qui fonde les valeurs, elle est d'actualité, mais elle n'est pas spécifiquement moderne. C'est, en somme, une idée religieuse élémentaireIn his "discussion ethics", Jorgen Habermas stands to-day as reference for those who wish to put the base of a secular and united moral doctrine. The idea of a "new polytheism" of values, as it was expressed by Max Weber, in his days, seems to be directly opposed to this project. Nevertheless, it's in Weber that Habermas has found the brainwave to take the western modernization as a display of reason possibilities, for he is particularly competent at solving moral problems. But the precise analysis of Habermas' text proves that the idea of practical-moral rationability is unproductive. Weber helps mostly to understand in modernity without religion the paradox of unreasonable rationalism. The concept of modernity as a stage of a rational surpass of religion comes from the faith in Jesus Christ, this is fulfilled in a true, solid, religion. Without believing in Christ, this concept has neither base nor prospect. The idea that people can and must communicate in order to reach a reasonable agreement on moral questions is in the air, though not specifically modern. On the whole it's an elementary religious view point
6
Pitano, Sandro de Castro. "Jürgen Habermas, Paulo Freire e a crítica à cidadania como horizonte educacional : uma proposta de revivificação da educação popular ancorada no conceito de sujeito social." reponame:Biblioteca Digital de Teses e Dissertações da UFRGS, 2008. http://hdl.handle.net/10183/14844.
Full textAbstract:
Esta tese se caracteriza como um trabalho bibliográfico, que aborda a obra de Paulo Freire e Jürgen Habermas, dimensionando e pondo em evidência o vigor diferenciado que oferecem para as reflexões em torno da Educação Popular. Trata de analisar o pensamento de ambos, com ênfase em seus ideais de sociedade, ressaltando-os em termos de reforma ou transformação social. Evidenciadas, suas utopias sociais são cotejadas com os pressupostos ontológicos da libertação, quando, então, investigando e problematizando o conceito de cidadão, busca-se demonstrar a sua insuficiência como paradigma da ação educativa libertadora. Pretende-se, ainda, definir e propor o conceito de sujeito social como o horizonte vigoroso de formação da Educação Popular. A tese se configura a partir da crítica ao cidadão e sua assunção como ideal formativo, afirmando que é o sujeito social, conceito oriundo do pensamento de Paulo Freire, e não o cidadão, propósito da teoria da sociedade de Jürgen Habermas, que constitui o horizonte de formação da Educação Popular, por coerência com seus princípios fundantes. Investigar o horizonte de formação a partir do contraponto teórico e prático das propostas de Freire e Habermas deve-se à forte influência exercida por ambos em vários campos da atividade humana, como a educação, a política e a sociologia. Na educação, a presença de Freire é marcadamente reconhecida não apenas no Brasil, onde a Educação Popular se apóia, explicitamente, em seus ensinamentos, como no mundo todo. Habermas, por sua vez, tem sido considerado um pensador cuja influência transcende os meios sociológico e filosófico, alcançando o pensamento educacional brasileiro com considerável vigor. Uma das premissas que orientaram esta pesquisa consiste na suspeita de que a teoria social habermasiana, dadas as suas características básicas, conduz à reforma (mudança cultural) e não à transformação (mudança radical nos âmbitos cultural, econômico e político) estrutural da sociedade. O que representaria uma diferença fundamental entre Freire e Habermas, a ser considerada por uma educação libertadora. Enquanto Habermas estipula uma “comunidade de fala ideal”, compartilhada por sujeitos, lingüisticamente, competentes, deliberando, livres de coação, sobre convenções polemizadas no devir histórico, Freire lida com uma realidade muito distante em termos de justiça social daquilo que o alemão idealiza: analfabetos e semianalfabetos em situação de opressão e miserabilidade social, vitimados pela herança de uma cultura colonialista e predatória, em processo desde o século XV. Um fosso enorme separa e distingue o interesse imediato dos indivíduos, determinado pela urgência e pelo grau das necessidades em cada contexto. Tais urgências são identificadas, concretamente, pelas desiguais competências dos sujeitos e das realidades concretas que os condicionam. Embora compartilhem um ideal semelhante, Freire e Habermas estão envolvidos com situações que, transcendendo a variações espaço-temporais, exigem respostas, pontualmente, diferentes.This thesis is characterized as a bibliographic work that approaches the work of Paulo Freire and Jürgen Habermas, where the differentiated force which is offered by them for discussions around Popular Education is sized and put in evidence. It concerns the analysis of both authors’ thoughts, with emphasis on its ideals of society, and showing them in terms of social reformation or transformation. Evidenced, their social utopias are compared with liberation ontological presuppositions when, by investigating and problematizing the concept of citizen, the demonstration its insufficiency as a paradigm of liberating education action is searched. The aim still is to define and propose the concept of social subject as the strong horizon of formation of Popular Education. This thesis is configured from the criticism about the citizen and his assumption as formative ideal, saying that he is the social subject, a concept from Paulo Freire’s thought, and not the citizen, purpose of Jürgen Habermas theory of society, which composes the horizon of formation of the Popular Education, by coherence with its base principles. The investigation of its horizon of formation from the theoretical and practical counterpoint of Freire and Habermas’ proposals is due to the strong influence that both exert on several fields of human activity, such as education, politics and sociology. In education, the presence of Freire is highly recognized not only in Brazil, where Popular Education is explicitly based on his teaching, but also in all over the world. Hebermas, in his turn, has been considered a thinker whose influence transcends the sociological and philosophical means, reaching the Brazilian educational thought with considerable force. One of the reasons which oriented this research consists in the suspicion that the Habermasian social theory, given its basic characteristics, leads to reformation (cultural change), and not to structural transformation (radical change in the cultural, economic and political fields) of the society. This one would represent a fundamental difference between Freire and Habermas, to be considered for a liberating education. As Habermas stipulates a "community of ideal speech", shared by linguistically competent people, and deliberates, free of coactions on polemized conventions in the historical transformations, Freire deals with a very distant reality in terms of social justice from what the German thinker idealizes: illiterates and semiilliterates in oppression and social miserability situations, victimed by a legacy of a colonial and predatory culture, in process since the fifteenth century. A huge gap separates and distinguishes individuals’ immediate interest, determined by the urgency and the degree of needs in each context. Such urgencies are well identified by the individuals’ unequal competences and concrete realities which condition them. Although they share a similar ideal, Freire and Habermas are involved with situations that, transcending to space-time variations, require punctually different responses.
7
Vajzer, Tatʹâna. "La communauté éthique : Georges Bataille et Jürgen Habermas." Paris 7, 2009. http://www.theses.fr/2009PA070068.
Full textAbstract:
Le travail sera consacré aux aspects éthiques de la communauté dans le projet de la communauté négative de Georges Bataille. Plus exactement, je place le projet de la communauté asociale et littéraire de Bataille dans le contexte de la critique de la rationalité communicative de Jûrgen Habermas qui propose son modèle éthique de la communauté positive de l'Etat démocratique moderne. Le philosophe français et le philosophe allemand sont absolument différents, presque non-comparables, mais d'autant plus est-il intéressant de les interroger sur les mêmes questions autour des notions de la communauté et de la communication éthiques. Cette polémique in absentia encore méconnue touche aux moments les plus douloureux de la conscience européenne traumatique de la période pendant suivant la Deuxième guerre mondiale: ceux de la communauté éthique, de l'autorité, de l'Absolu dans la structure de l'action sociale, de la conscience morale, de l' action communicationnelle, de l'altérité radicale, de la limite d'Autrui (post-métaphysique) ou des autrui (social). Ces deux conceptions ont le même but: prévenir le déroulement du totalitarisme en Europe et faire revenir à la culture européenne la voix effacée d'Autrui. Néanmoins, elles s'opposent dans les moyens de la réalisation de leur but ainsi que dans les présupposés de leur raisonnementThe dissertation is devoted to the community ethics in the project of the "negative community" of the French philosopher Georges Bataille and in the project of the "positive community" of the German philosopher Jürgen Habermas. More accurately, I will consider Bataille's project of an asocial and intellectual (imaginary) community in the light of Habermas' rationalist criticism proposing another ethical model of the positive community in the contemporary democratic State. The two philosophers are absolutely different, almost not-comparable, but it seems to me all the more interesting to ask them the same questions on the notions of community, communication, common etc. This polemics in absentia, being hardly known today, touches for ail that the extremely painful moments of the post-traumatic European conscience during and after the Second World War and namely: community ethics, authority, the Absolute in the structure of social action, moral conscience, communicative action, radical Otherness, the limits of the (transcendental, post-metaphysical) Other as well as of the (social) others and so on. Thus, the two conceptions have the same goal: to prevent a new totalitarianism in Europe and to return into the European culture the effaced voice of the Other. However, they are opposite to one another in a radical way in the means of the realisation of their projects as well as in the presupposition of their reasoning
8
Bankovsky, Miriam Ann. "La Justice sociale après Kant : entre constructivisme et déconstruction (Rawls, Habermas, Lévinas, Derrida)." Paris 10, 2008. http://www.theses.fr/2008PA100117.
Full textAbstract:
Le but de cette thèse est d’examiner le rapport entre deux approches de la justice : d’une part, le projet constructiviste et reconstructiviste de Rawls et Habermas et d’autre part, le projet déconstructionniste de Lévinas et Derrida. Nous cherchons d’abord à identifier la différence centrale entre les approches, reconstruisant chaque théorie de la justice telle qu’elle se construit en rapport avec la philosophie pratique de Kant. Nous montrons ensuite que ces deux projets sont complémentaires. Rawls et Habermas défendent la possibilité de déterminer le contenu de l’impartialité kantienne au moyen de « la position originelle » ou du « principe de discussion ». Au contraire, Lévinas et Derrida soutiennent l’impossibilité de cerner le contenu de la justice. A partir d’une lecture non-kantienne du principe moral, Lévinas défend un concept non-formel de responsabilité pour autrui. Certes, Derrida affirme la possibilité de la justice, mais il soutient aussi que sa forme déterminée ne saurait réconcilier la responsabilité devant autrui avec l’idée d’impartialité. Nous défendons ensuite la complémentarité de ces deux projets. « La foi raisonnable » dans la possibilité de la justice doit être complétée par l’affirmation de son impossibilité. En revanche, la défense de l’impossibilité est insatisfaisante sans affirmer la possibilité de construire une société équitable. En nous éloignant de la critique libérale selon laquelle la déconstruction se retire de la politique (Fraser, McCarthy, Benhabib), nous apportons notre appui à des voix dissidentes (Cornell, Mouffe, Honig, Young, Honneth, Patton, Thomassen) qui font valoir que la déconstruction est utile à la tradition constructivisteThis thesis examines the relation between two contrasting approaches to justice: the constructive and reconstructive projects of Rawls and Habermas on the one hand, and the deconstructive projects of Levinas and Derrida on the other. First, I identify the central difference between the two projects, reconstructing each account of justice as it develops in relation to Kant’s practical philosophy. I then argue that the two projects are complementary. Whilst Rawls and Habermas defend the possibility of objectively realising Kant’s impartial standpoint by means of the “original position” or the “procedures of discourse ethics”, Levinas and Derrida affirm the impossibility of determining the content of justice. In Kant’s moral law, Levinas discovers a non-Kantian principle of responsibility for the particular other which conflicts with impartiality. Distinguishing himself still further, Derrida defends the “undecidability” of justice’s function. Justice must be pursued but no local determination can reconcile responsibility for the other with impartiality among all. I then defend the complementarity of the two projects. “Reasonable faith” in the possibility of justice must be supplemented by the acknowledgment of its impossibility. Conversely, attesting to justice’s failure is unsatisfactory without commitment to the possibility of constructing just social forms. Distancing myself from the liberal critique whereby deconstruction withdraws from the political (Fraser, McCarthy, Benhabib), I instead add my voice to a dissenting group (Young, Cornell, Mouffe, Honig, Honneth, Patton, Thomassen) which affirms that deconstruction can productively engage with the constructive tradition
9
Brennand, Edna Gusmao de Goes. "Éducation et globalisation : un dialogue entre Paulo Freire et Jürgen Habermas." Paris 1, 1999. http://www.theses.fr/1999PA010690.
Full textAbstract:
Le présent travail se base sur l'articulation de la pédagogie du dialogue de Freire avec les caractéristiques singulières de la rationalité communicationnelle de Habermas. Au moyen de l'intégration de certaines catégories de la théorie de l'action communicationnelle dans la pédagogie du dialogue, nous nous sommes proposés de contribuer à l'élargissement du débat sur le processus de construction dela connaissance en tant que moteur de la formation du moi compétents dans l'argumentation et dans les formes d'intéraction, capables de participer à des systèmes d'action toujours plus complexes, d'une façon socialement compétente et individuellement autonome. Nous avons cherché à poser des questions significatives quant au rôle de l'éducation dans le processus de fomentation de stratégies discursives capables de mettre en route des actions sociales complexes et, par conséquent, de pousser les sujets à participer activement à la construction d'une société plus démocratique. Nous sommes partie de l'analyse de la crise de la modernité pour comprendre des formes de manifestation de la raison communicationnelle et de la raison instrumentale dans le mouvement dialectique du processus de modernisation capitaliste. L'objectif a été de composer une base théorique sur laquelle ont été définis des indicateurs méthodologiques pour l'éducation populaire. L'axe analytique recherche a été la fondation de la théorie de l'action communicationnelle et de la pédagogie du dialogue pour renforcer le débat sur le rôle de l'éducation dans la complexite, les contradictions et les conflits du monde contemporain.
10
Prokob, Emmanuel. "Enquête sur l'antagonisme franco-allemand dans l'histoire." Paris, EHESS, 2015. http://www.theses.fr/2015EHES0100.
Full textAbstract:
Un remarquable parallélisme constitue le point de départ de l'enquête : les arguments échangés lors de la controverse entre Jürgen Habermas et Michel Foucault en 1983 évoquent ceux de la polémique entre intellectuels français et allemands pendant la première guerre mondiale. L'antagonisme franco-allemand ainsi esquissé appartient au domaine des représentations, il se caractérise par deux aspects : premièrement, les discours s'opposant tendent, à certains moments critiques, à se présenter comme « scientifiques ». Deuxièmement, ils s'affirment chacun comme la représentation adéquate de la liberté qui constitue le fondement de toute légitimité politique et sociale en modernité. L'antagonisme actualise le problème de la représentabilité de la liberté qui traverse l'histoire de la pensée occidentale. Transcendant les discours disciplinaires spécifiques, qu'ils soient issus des sciences humaines et sociales, des arts et lettres, de la philosophie, la théologie ou la politique, ce problème requiert un genre particulier, celui de lenquête, que la thèse développe et précise. Placée dans la perspective de la polémique des intellectuels de 1914-18, l'étude de la controverse entre Habermas et Foucault fournit les moyens de ce travail : en mettant directement en pratique les enseignements tirés, la thèse spécifie sa propre herméneutique et construit le cadre de l'interprétation de l'antagonisme en dépassant le clivage historique entre une interprétation proprement française et respectivement allemande de la libertéA notable parallel is the starting point of the inquiry: the arguments used during the debate between Jiirgen Habermas and Michel Foucault in 1983 remind those of the controversy between French and German intellectuals during the first world war. The thus outlined antagonism belongs to the field of representations, it can be described by two specific features: first, at critical times the conflicting discourses tend to present themselves as "scientific", second, each of them claims to be the adequate representation of liberty that is at the base of all modern political and social legitimacy The antagonism recasts the problem of the representability of liberty that runs through the history of occidental thought. Transcending the borderlines between specific disciplines, i. E. Between humanities, social sciences, arts and literature, philosophy or theology, this problem calls for a genre of its own, the inquiry, defined and elaborated by this dissertation itself. Linked to that of the war controversy the study of the debate between Habermas and Foucault provides the means for this task: putting its findings directly into practice, the dissertation develops its own hermeneutic and produces the antagonism's frame of interpretation. Thereby the historical gap between both a peculiar German and French interpretation of liberty can be overcome
Books on the topic "Jürgen (1926-....)"
1
1964-, Hirsch Thomas, and Schlieker-Buckup Claudia, eds. Hans-Jürgen Schlieker: Malerei [1946-2003]. Bönen: Kettler, 2009.
Find full text
2
Klauke, Jürgen. Jürgen Klauke: Trost für Arschlöcher, oder Desaströses Ich : 1996-2000. Köln: Wienand, 2000.
Find full text
3
Haun, Horst. Kommunist und "Revisionist": Die SED-Kampagne gegen Jürgen Kuczynski (1956-1959). Dresden: Hannah-Arendt-Institut, 1999.
Find full text
4
Covenant and communication: A Christian moral conversation with Jürgen Habermas. Lanham, MD: University Press of America, 2006.
Find full text
5
Galerie Frank Schlag & Cie, Villa Goecke, and Neue Städtische Galerie Gladbeck, eds. Slick surfaces: Jürgen Meyer *1945, Michael Jäger *1956, Peter Zimmermann *1956, Sery C. *1959, Wilhelm Mundt *1959, Jürgen Jansen *1960, Robert Acuna *1967, Barbara Bernrieder *1970, Elizabeth Cooper *1972. [Köln]: Salon, 2008.
Find full text
6
The critique of instrumental reason from Weber to Habermas. New York, USA: Continuum International Pub. Group, 2010.
Find full text
7
Klauke, Jürgen. Jürgen Klauke, le désastre du moi: Oeuvres récentes, 1996-2001 : exposition, Paris, Maison européenne de la photographie, 20 juin-2 sept. 2001. Paris: Paris audiovisuel Jürgen Klauke, 2001.
Find full text
8
Hanks, J. Craig. Refiguring Critical Theory: Jürgen Habermas and the Possibilities of Political Change. University Press of America, 2003.
Find full text
9
Cowan, Brian. Making Publics and Making Novels. Edited by Alan Downie. Oxford University Press, 2013. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199566747.013.002.
Full textAbstract:
The two most influential works for the study of eighteenth-century literary culture in the last half-century must surely be Ian Watt’s The Rise of the Novel (1957) and Jürgen Habermas’s The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere (1962). This essay discusses the influence of both Watt and Habermas on studies of the novel and the public sphere, and it explores the reasons for the endurance of their arguments despite decades of substantial criticism devoted to their interpretative shortcomings. It also explains the emergence of a post-Habermasian approach to the history of public-making in response to these criticisms. It concludes by discussing how recent post-Habermasian studies of news culture and political partisanship may illuminate the history of the origins of the English novel.
10
Fritz, Blakolmer, and Borchhardt Jürgen, eds. Fremde Zeiten: Festschrift für Jürgen Borchhardt zum sechzigsten Geburtstag am 25. Februar 1996, dargebracht von Kollegen, Schülern und Freunden. Wien: Phoibos Verlag, 1996.
Find full textBook chapters on the topic "Jürgen (1926-....)"
1
Neal, Ryan A. "Jürgen Moltmann (1926- )." In The Student's Companion to the Theologians, 461–71. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing Ltd, 2013. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/9781118427170.ch65.
Full text
2
Ottmann, Henning. "Jürgen Habermas (*1929)." In Geschichte des politischen Denkens, 100–130. Stuttgart: J.B. Metzler, 2012. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-476-00491-8_3.
Full text
3
Zahner, Nina Tessa. "Jürgen Habermas (*1929)." In Klassiker der Soziologie der Künste, 679–703. Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden, 2016. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-01455-1_30.
Full text
4
Vester, Heinz-Günter. "Jürgen Habermas (geb. 1929)." In Kompendium der Soziologie III: Neuere soziologische Theorien, 109–29. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, 2010. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-531-92158-7_7.
Full text
5
Böhles, Hansjosef. "von Willebrand-Jürgens-Syndrom, 1926." In Historische Fälle aus der Medizin, 239–48. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2020. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-59833-7_26.
Full text
6
Ruske, Walter. "Der Verlag Chemie unter Jürgen Kreuzhage und Hans Schermer." In Verlag Chemie 1921-1971, 71–79. Weinheim, Germany: Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, 2015. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/9783527696390.ch4.
Full text
7
Fleming, Ted. "Jürgen Habermas (1929–): The Importance of Higher Education for Democracy." In Debating Higher Education: Philosophical Perspectives, 191–203. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2020. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-31061-5_15.
Full text
8
Moebius, Stephan. "Reconstruction and Consolidation of Sociology in West Germany from 1945 to 1967." In Sociology in Germany, 49–84. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2021. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-71866-4_3.
Full textAbstract:
AbstractThis chapter will focus on the two decades after 1945, the period of the “post-war society” (1945–1967), which in the historical sciences is also characterized as a period of boom (keywords: “Wirtschaftswunder” (“economic miracle”), expansion of the welfare state, expansion of the educational sector, certainty about the future) and which comes to an end in the 1970s. Germany was undergoing a profound process of change: socio-structural changes in an advanced industrial society, structural changes in the family and a retreat into the private sphere, new opportunities in the areas of consumption and leisure due to the “Wirtschaftswunder,” urbanization and changes in communities, “Western Integration” (“Westbindung”), the ban on the KPD (Communist Party of Germany) in 1956, remilitarization, the development of the mass media and mass motorization, and the repression of the Nazi past were central social and sociological issues. At the same time, fascist tendencies were still virulent during the 1950s and 1960s. After 1945, sociology had to be rebuilt. Journals were refounded or newly founded, the German Sociological Association was restored and sociology was re-established as a teaching subject. Different “schools” and regional centers of sociology emerged. The so-called Cologne School centered around René König, the Frankfurt School around Adorno and Horkheimer, and the circle around Helmut Schelsky should be mentioned in particular; but also, Wolfgang Abendroth, Werner Hofmann, and Heinz Maus (Marburg School), Otto Stammer (Berlin), Arnold Bergstraesser (Freiburg i.Br.), and Helmuth Plessner (Göttingen). Despite their theoretical and political differences, up until the 1950s, they all had in common the decisive will for political and social enlightenment regarding the post-war situation. Furthermore, the particular importance that empirical social research and non-university research institutions had for the further development of sociology after 1945 is worth mentioning.At the end of the 1950s, field-specific dynamics gained momentum. The different “schools” and groups tried to secure and expand their position in the sociological field and their divergent research profiles became increasingly visible. The so-called civil war in sociology drove the actors further apart. Additionally, disciplinary struggles and camp-building processes during the first 20 years of West German sociology revolved around the debate on role theory and the dispute over positivism. By the end of the 1950s, an institutional and generational change can be observed. The so-called post-war generation, which included Ralf Dahrendorf, Jürgen Habermas, Niklas Luhmann, Erwin K. Scheuch, Heinrich Popitz, Hans Paul Bahrdt, M. Rainer Lepsius, and Renate Mayntz, assumed central positions in organizations, editorial boards of journals, and universities. While the early “schools” and circles (König, Schelsky, Adorno, and Horkheimer) initially focused on the sociology of the family and empirical research, the following generation concentrated foremost on industrial sociology, but also on topics of social structure and social stratification as well as on social mobility.
9
"Jürgen Moltmann (1926- )." In Christian Understandings of Creation, 231–50. 1517 Media, 2017. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/j.ctt1tm7hq2.15.
Full text
10
"Jürgen Moltmann (1926–)." In A Reader in Ecclesiology, 245. Routledge, 2016. http://dx.doi.org/10.4324/9781315565118-86.
Full text