Let's begin then.
We have approximately 20 minutes for each one.
20-25 minutes each presentation.
Let's see if we have time for a brief exchange.
The first speaker is Professor Claudio
Knapp, who is currently a professor
at the University of Quilmes and has
had a career in universities in England,
Belgium, France and also in Spain, Eh.
His fields of work, uh, are related
to epistemology, Latin American
thought, colonialism, and reflection on knowledge.
The space has published numerous books on peripheral
imaginaries in the 19th century, such as death and
transformation and transfiguration of the Rioplatense
culture in Ci Valdeón in 2005 or Imaginario
Patagonia in 2012 in Editorial Peter Lang.
Lately in the last ones.
Since 2007, 2008, he has been
publishing practically one book a year.
The latter are route, lack, ethnographic memory,
biopolitics, living and non-living in speculation and
native circulation, anthropo-fossils and humanism.
Speculation, all of them published by Peter Lang Publishing.
Today he is going to talk to us about philosophy and peripheral 19th-century
colonialism.
Whenever the teacher wants.
Okay, thanks.
Israel.
Very kind, as always, huh?
Well, what I'm actually going to try to do is, uh, try to
get closer to the argument of the colloquium.
Can you hear me okay? No?
Perfectly.
Okay. Uh.
Based on what I'm working on, the things I'm working on now.
I am actually working from a philosophical point
of view on the conceptual exhaustion of modernity,
especially in peripheral areas, and the impact
that the new climate regime, memory, and
the Anthropocene have on that.
No, as one might think, huh?
When the human figure is no longer the parameter of
scale for philosophy, let's say, right?
Put simply, then,
eh, eh?
In philosophy, we have, let's say, four things in
the title that I sent you: the theme of philosophy,
the question of colonialism, the idea of ​​the
19th century, and the adjective, let's say, of non-qualifying.
So, huh?
All of this taking into account that the idea,
or proposal of the colloquium, was to work on
the idea of ​​a fiction archive, right?
So, philosophy basically in the 19th century,
uh, had three, three variants in Europe.
Was the first thing history, which is how philosophy
slowly took shape, what we now call institutional
philosophy, meaning that philosophy
presupposed the study of philosophy, right?
And the second variant that existed in European
philosophy in the 19th century was as a justification
of the Enlightenment, that is, everything that
revolved around the idea of ​​reason, uh, the idea of
​​how, let's say, in some way a conceptual structure
could be built that fulfilled, let's say,
the objectives of the Enlightenment, right?
And the third domain, which is, let's say, a
legacy of philosophy, which dates back to the
Middle Ages and earlier, has to do with
the foundation of the figure of man.
In other words, these were the three, let's say, major
currents from which the philosophy of was defined.
You know what?
Philosophy in the university sense only
exists from the 20th century onwards.
In other words, there were academic institutions
in Europe long before the 20th century.
They obviously teach philosophy, but let's say,
philosophy as an institution is a phenomenon.
Uh, from the 20th century.
To give an example, in France, for instance, the first philosophy
program in schools and institutes was in 1904, although the
Collège de France already existed in France, as well as another
institution in Germany where philosophy was practiced.
Why am I explaining this?
Because, uh, let's say in the sense of the peripheral
world, what interests me, uh, philosophy didn't exist,
that is, what was done in the peripheral world, let's say,
in what at that time were called the colonies, was basically
to reproduce the cruelty of European philosophy.
This even goes back to the time of its founding.
Did the first university residences in Córdoba, for example, originate
in Argentina or at Harvard, where the first university residences
appeared, which would later become the first American universities, right?
In those places there was already a chair or something that resembled
the teaching of philosophy, but in reality it was the teaching of
European philosophy, that is, the European idea that there is a domain
of reflection that accompanies civil society, which is
what is defined, let's say, basically as philosophy.
In Europe that doesn't exist, that is, it never existed.
In other words, it did not exist in the 19th century and it did not exist
afterwards.
So, what we can call the equivalent of what philosophy was in the
19th century in the colonies, was the problem of language: that a
region, a country, a population, has a language, does not have a language.
That's the big debate.
For example, the archetypal case in Argentina of
Domingo Faustino Sarmiento, who discusses the
better or worse application of a language, the mastery of a language or
not?
And then, let's say, or going towards the end of the 19th
century, the relevance of whether or not there was a
language of their own in the colonies, let's say.
That was as close as one could get to what was called philosophy.
Not in Europe? And in fact, the big discussion
that will take place, uh, the discussion that
will conclude, let's say in some way, if
one can speak of a conclusion of this.
This debate takes place around the 1920s,
the 20th century, precisely the.
The great discussion between Castro's Mexico and Jorge Luis Borges about the
relevance
of having or not having one's own language, one's own tongue.
So, this is what concerns philosophy, what concerns colonialism.
Pluralism is a phenomenon, it is a 20th century concept.
There is no colonialism, let's say, in that word applying the idea of
​​colonialism to something that preceded, let's say, the 20th century.
Conceptually, it is not correct.
Let's say, what we have are indeed jobs, right?
For example, colonization exists as a word. The
colonizers exist as a word, but it's an administrative
phenomenon; that is, it was a phenomenon, let's
say, of some kind of management of properties or colonies.
No, it didn't have, it didn't have the political connotation.
That is, it comes directly and it is evident that there is a colonization,
let's say, and we call it colonization, in order to understand,
to understand each other, let's say.
But wasn't there, let's say, a concept in
critical terms of the policies carried out
by the European powers to identify such an event, right?
That's a later phenomenon. Why?
Why do I say this?
Because indeed, talking today about,
let's say, the interference that European nations had in.
For example, in the case of Latin America, without using the word
colonialism, it is difficult; practically no one does.
And yet, conceptually it is not entirely correct.
In other words, there is a historiographical problem there and an
epistemic correction that needs to be made, right?
That is, people.
For example, in the case of Argentina's independence
in 1810, that is, when the first discussions began,
the oppositions to the imperial centers were
administrative or political oppositions in the
administrative sense, but there was no conception,
let's say, how to put it, of a cultural one, in the sense
that can be understood today as a cultural critique
of how colonization was carried out, and this is important.
Because?
Because it has to do with the way in which it will later be explained
how colonization had an impact on what were called local independence movements,
right?
Or in what was called the creation of nation-states, let's say, right?
That's going to have a very strong impact. Why?
Because political independence will indeed be confused with
linguistic and cultural independence, which are not the same
thing and which doesn't happen or didn't happen. Right?
Then there is another element which is the 19th century, let's say the 19th
century.
For us it does not exist, but is like a historiographical entity.
Not saying the 19th century in the historical sense is a graphic
construction, that is, let's say, I think you are already historians,
you have a clearer understanding of that issue than I do.
And why is this important?
Because deep down, uh, that means that the
idea of ​​history that existed, let's say
in the peripheral world, didn't have it,
it suffered in some way from a, how to say, lack of scale.
The same thing happened with the subject of philosophy in Europe.
At that time there were, let's say, three great histories, let's say
three great corpora that called themselves historical.
One was natural history, it begins to say you want with
Lamarck and all the discussions about whether there
is a way to study the terrestrial evolution of fauna and flora from
history.
The other was a story that we can call today about events, which at the
time was not called that, but which dealt with big events, let's say.
And the third one was the institutional history, right?
History of the Bourbon monarchy. Yes.
And all that.
It had two methodologies that basically followed Thucydides' classical
methodology.
Herodotus said, "History is what happened."
Or will some later talk of 30 years as a minimum threshold
to be able to understand that the historical figures and
others who followed Herodotus, who was a historian in the present, right?
That's what in Greece was called the cribe, right?
In other words, it's the way we can get closest to
the event as it's happening and bear witness.
That is what legitimized this project in some way, and what existed in
Europe was a combination of these three types of history.
If you want more of these two methodologies.
So, what then?
What of all that exists in Latin America?
In a similar way, let's say, if what historians do, for example, I
cite the case of Sarmiento again, is to praise, for example,
Michelle, who was a historian they know well, who basically falls
within their parameters of the 19th century, which is written, right?
So, in what happens in Latin America to categorize history, it was this
idea that what was being done in Europe had to be copied, with the addition
that the colonies were indeed seen, precisely because there was no idea
of ​​colonialism, the colonies were seen as a historical evolution, a
natural consequence of what had already happened in Europe.
So, at best, the fate of the colonies was to imitate Europe.
With a delay of 30, 40, 50, or 60 years, which led, as you
already know, to the idea of ​​modernity at the end of the 19th century.
And that whole idea of ​​modernity is going to permeate the entire 20th
century.
Authors from the right, from the left, more critical, less critical.
Everything will, let's say, jump on the bandwagon of
modernity as an element of change or modifier, let's say,
of the situation that existed and that was considered to be transitory.
And. And then the
The issue of peripherality does indeed have to do with this lack of scale,
let's say, not what we call history in Europe, it's not what is called
peripheral in Latin America, for example, to give an example.
The same applies to philosophy.
So the idea of ​​peripheral is inevitable; a scale has to be built to
understand what is happening.
For example, there will be many in literature.
This theorist.
There is a case, the one who founded institutional literary
criticism in Argentina is named Ricardo Rojas and he spoke of this
phenomenon where there was a lag, no, as he said, if what happens
in Europe happens in Latin America 30 years later, this idea of
​​building a scale to understand what is happening is no longer useful.
So.
In philosophy and colonialism of the 20th century, 19th
century in the periphery, what I want to suggest is that
there is a problematic conceptual basis where certain
concepts do not indicate what they say and that all of that
will be transferred, if you will, to the 20th century, right?
In other words, first of all there will be a misunderstanding about philosophy.
Because?
Because it will lead people to think that philosophy can be done in peripheral
countries, which is not accurate.
First.
Firstly, because there has never been a civil society in
peripheral countries, and philosophy advocates
for and assumes one in those countries. Yes.
And secondly, because there is no philosophical institutional framework,
let's say, like there is in Europe, as is the case.
So it can't be done, what's going to happen?
There is a thought process, but all of that will actually take place in the 20th
century.
But the problem already arises there. That is to say, for
that reason many literary theories, many literary theorists
from Latin America, will say that in some way, doing
philosophy in Latin America is writing literature.
The issue of colonialism also produces some confusion,
because it is thought that the issue of colonialism,
especially with the evolution of academic institutions,
can be addressed through the issue of social science.
So we can denounce, so to speak, colonialism from the perspective
of history, from the perspective of sociology, when in reality
it was already clear at the end of the 20th century that what was
to be called social sciences could only really exist based
on the belief in the natural sciences.
That is the position held, for example, by an anthropologist like
Philip de Scola, who clearly states that the social sciences would
not exist if the existence of the natural sciences were not assumed,
in the sense that in epistemology is called non-homology.
In other words, the true methodology of scientists is that of the natural
sciences, which the social sciences copy.
So, if that's the case, imagine the misunderstanding that occurs in
the 20th century, where someone who reproduces the non-biological
model actually thinks that from a social science methodology they can actually
criticize colonialism.
Well, if it really isn't a misunderstanding.
The issue of timing, let's say, is another element.
Indeed.
Hmm. Let's say in school textbooks, for example, to give a
parameter, an empirical example, nobody talks about the 19th
century and classifies the 19th century, no, the 19th century
does not exist as a universal concept. What we call the 19th
century in Europe has practically nothing to do
with what is called the 19th century in Latin America.
Then we can hardly talk about the same thing.
So there's a problem of scale there too.
If there is a problem of misunderstanding there, and
then in the peripheral sense, undoubtedly, because
indeed, let's say modernity, which is an element that
we can say was realized in the central countries, modernity
did not take place in the peripheral countries
and today that is seen in a more evident way.
Indeed, from the new climate regime, which in some way, in philosophical
terms, as several authors have already demonstrated, signifies
the conceptual exhaustion of modernity, right?
So that also produces, produces a misunderstanding.
So,
uh, this
Where does this situation I'm presenting leave us?
Well, the idea was that there was an archive, a fiction, huh?
In 19th-century Latin America, the idea of ​​the archive
functioned in two ways. There was a historiography that was not
in the literal sense; it was as we can understand it today based
on the work that is happening there. It was not another contemporary
historiography, but rather the sum of publications, so to speak.
And then there was the library and the museum.
You see, you have protective institutions.
Wasn't there any speculative reflection there? I mean, what they were trying
to do was create an institution, to identify, let's say, right?
Thus, historiography as a sum of publications,
the library as a place of knowledge storage,
and the museum as a place of regional authentication.
For example, the Museum of Latin America is going to start
accumulating all the items related to indigenous people, right?
So, one element related to geological findings to justify
that this territory already existed in the time when
there were dinosaurs, and that somehow justified the
importance of having a single nation, right?
At that time, of course, there was no idea of ​​an
archive in the 19th century on the periphery.
No, it did not presuppose the concepts of archives,
as we have them in the 20th century in the West.
I don't know.
Consider Jacques Derrida's text, "Archive
Motto," where he analyzes how the archive
is mixed with a Freudian identity.
Without that I had nothing, I had no place.
And does the theme of fiction have to do with a status of the silicic
real, a justification of naturalism, that is, all the literature
of the periphery in the 19th century is devoted to justifying
two things: a sense of the real and a presence, let's say, of a
nature, with which, in some way, fiction appeared,
appeared as a substitute for the real, right?
That is to say, it is clearly a paradox that this
alternative to reality appears in fiction and that
today we read 19th-century literature as a representation
of reality; it is epistemologically interesting, it is a catastrophe.
And yet, that's what most literary
analysts do these days. Isn't it?
Okay.
Okay, that's it.
That was it.
So.
Okay, so we move on to Mario Hugo five from
Harry's University in Mario five.
He is a professor of German literature at that university.
Universities there in Italy.
And that topic has been dedicated to studies related
to the intellectual history of the Germanic world,
among which stand out Romanticism and authors such
as Jünger, Spengler and more recently Nietzsche
and his relationship with Romanticism,
etc., which he has just published.
This book, this book, and last year another one about otherness.
In addition, he is a member of the Italian Association of
Germans and editor of the journal Critique of the History of Ideas of
Today.
Mario is going to talk to us about Kierkegaard at the Cultural Criticism of
Modern niche.
Whenever you want, Mario.
Thank you very
So. Um.
My presentation.
Best seller of the outsider in the
early niche and in Kierkegaard
as a critic with Modern
am in
that you describe yourself as one of the forms
of the modern outside of the sea of ​​the case of civilization.
Nothing, but what are you doing now?
Diplomat like me.
Of Aníbal and default for it follows.
What is even it like one its waves
traveling on the same, but not private.
Kevin.
As long as you continue with up in the
gay science also cats includes tradition
because think Richard as crazy Energy
Encounters overture 11 devil they hold of.
Go live in gay himself is as the only
one clearly crash of consequences of a dust of God.
It is
reason that it dfas from is contemporary
is our war blind to what is happening
before the is the end of the story
tradition, the soul sage in a world.
Of course is replaced by the philosophizing
and the critical maternity haste soul
Sea the crisis of Civilization Plunkett
in the darkness, the chair already starting
with Russell, tex on the best characteristics
of fight of the subversion troll denunciation
of the outpost, active minds of a Civilization
as quiché native phenomena similar Harley
in the book entitled Stage on the life way
quick or credits the deviant and the
marginalized intellectual with the
privilege of veins as Sir Max world one
thing is certain the world and all that
rituals darin never appears as clea as
wan observed from the cycle spot and
modulate par sharp stations led
andquot.
TICs m Contemporary house ti Kirke
de Sans in it and age of Dissolution
and de profit reminiscent of the
age of Aristophanes in which the
state of religion collapse and in
which make rites or is confusion
that for in our age of light mind.
Kierkegaard observes Asics is lost inside.
I think that's way a sort of God becomes
insignificant to ideal families and
now one no longer exists religious life
falling back into paganism in this
connection Kierkegaard place open
outsider because he is the doctor who
stands apart from the humanity discussed
it, but mediocre game of the man
of full enthusiasm for great place.
Just moral It as I g right pot is brief
Compendio of police regulations
and code became increasing le incipit
offers Generations as a result of
development of finite rationality
and consequent life that you
absolute
The city of culture Occupy a
central position in Echas
subtitle in I Noguerol Lakeshore
on Holman and Classical Philology
delivered in Aydin e Sixty nine
meters, River sis cnicas same
time I take away.
Philosophy faith facta philologia
buyers setting that filosofia
facta est philologia Fuit British
Jemaine historical state of the
past is a form of goji and a shaping
the Essence of its resident in other words.
Growing conception philosophy example
five buddy early stocks, sizes in philology
and for reconstruction in the state of the
universal South Blogging with the past.
Hanna made poetics They use a Foucauldian
expression no leg which is paragon and
the last word aims affect thinks man's
way of being philosophy as Beckham
Synology I mean this case it is necessary
to arrive so typical gesture of the nature
to make the philosophie ento philológico
that one has to take this starting point
Seneca critique o de transformation of
philosophy into a worst doctrinal no
laje that from life in order to in trust
history with that transformative task
of philosophy in other words niche
understand that the modern world trade
philosophical over sales can take place.
Deconstruction of a bighorn civilization
providing useful tools, metamorphosis of his riders.
What is the state is that Deliverance
rider from decadent form of same
activity to be exhibition to use a mitcham.
Expression Es means that for to make
you over history for each therapeutic ends today.
Tulip, Derrida part of the more of
transformation and that Violette
Psychological Foundations of new
Civilization of making history is
das da initiation because it implicit
over the warning of axiological and
follows order before Liberation of
mine from the streets of the identity
the ones that thing that niche from
is iOS on wars alt militante with
philosophy because I feel Ricard
existent as something solid as error
and drug contrast between what I could
Lewiston of a sale fault which remain
the way in our reflection capable of
sending out Sparks and in the present
West its flame modern it is that, but
for Kierkegaard and for niche the
road over and the generated form of
the subject activity that has lost
state of fornells in quirke is such
a decadent form of subject.
David, you agree with the psychological
structure of the soul has man of post
Enlightenment Borgia civilization I
strange from the passion for the absolute
a philosopher also tex on the rule of the
romantic escapes outsider flying from the
castle present into the splendid word opened up by books.
It is possible your charm of mine that
protagonis iver hordes of class code
the fairies with meet That's the times
ideal icon plain that's the jar Ratchet
for the year without passion people
are as fain and fragile as lace.
And then save Pity espitia as Lace.
Making of the art.
Art. Ratchet to be Seinfeld fight
on van fetish with my soul.
Always can back to the Old Testament and to Shakespeare.
That one still fills those who spec.
Acción beings that they said that they
have they have the matter of the cars is
the Sundance from all Generations that
they see him and cold at the same time
diagnosis with a clarity phenomena of
massification which products blanket
egos and the call of the masses modern
characteristic new created according
to what the crowd is be a forest the crowd
scot, the crowd is the truth, the crowd
is power and the one or as wants to charge,
wants to glories that's in front training
new idol and establish single enemy
testimony of the number and the main
Disney no strategy coincides with Lost
Contemporary of Tocqueville so that
every truth master welfare of them to
the crowd asked rights the form of the
outsider of moleste idols of the
filosoffa for assets that would the
process of education of mankind is
process of individualization and it girl.
Short films from the majority also
because it is to tech a stand against
the the new das not exposed explosion
itself isolation that closes your list.
Resorts
to be deprived of the place in the
crowd in fact as spirits to
have know NaNoWriMo.
Into the master is what the animal, The animals man fears
most of all
compass and the works according to it.
As isolation Everyone is so afraid of the fairies.
Observe. Kierkegaard.
That no one tars to be an high and cold
or one
is slavery from the possibility of
vitamin watches in individual one
to become many and I generates into
the form of existence of being a copy
soul horizon is number.
Toilet
calls Fiji Genius mann, Dover David
from this comparative the main risen.
Valentine.
Soul Years such genius mann
briefly in the full individual.
Cancer Dark souls with becoming
the man in the age of the personalized
masses the year the only language
human beings in a word of man quest
with wasted lost lives as sky rides
6th crowd is on the rise.
Always guided as marks ngs Ask
Schopenhauer As educator,
Nietzsche anal Wesley Sex solution as Richmond.
Inflexible inflexible, Society
and Indian by just do not.
According to your
n is I see in fact shopper our group
the shadow of an isolation.
This is the first bangemann that before
asking as a niche rights and command
man leading in Associated bound
a common
TikTok fail niche to believe that the
best of the majority establishment
established do not conform to take a
mindset into outcast razor for the never
philosophy as well democratic Iran
creates standard dies spinks an outcast
effect, marginalization that default
darling and christ That's the ambivalent
nature of solitude that exists possible
for that shows and the outsider jukebox
out is flying secession from society
its functions and the convenience which
is the gateway through and the fully
human life in the possibility
of life breathing full time.
Jim, you will burn in the negative variant of
the loneliness of the living Indians.
Damn, far from what is coming from from
standard and uh dashboard with time to
isolation by booking of the Schopenhauer
is faith and his historical role teachers
shows how solitude and isolation or
crossley intact and I society dominate
Vietnam majority because however
separates himself from it is at the same
time expand and roll like it.
It's margins as and accept annex table eccentricity.
The beginning of the fire and family meditation
dedicated to stopping and our as an educators also
contains at enchanted and satirical criticism of human macho.
And if you establish me stop loss of a
cultural criticism of that you would
take human beings like it is in ganger
because people are effective to be dan
sales sense bingo assault means coming
conflict with that conventions of
demases man news is something unique,
but give it for sea of ​​the social.
I quote that ways upon life in
accordance when we want in almost
sales as be transformation of
the man who in himself is and on
respectable miracle as rights.
In your writing you offend acts like
a hard das outline your size Mister
Clay or modes of being that you are
fans of the last man judge himself and
the life of the most in which factory
Mayday, mayday Goetz dominate the
house of this With both start with
which Schopenhauer branding man La
a king a peculiar in print signals back to the essay
on the
individual aspects of the salt
sketch out 20 minutes place Warren
Restoration of the Sage right niche
bro bar in place a David and the task
I midjourney to ridiculous the mass
man of this time and that's the show
rider is true face ask me look using
technique of climax and fast.
Observe.
More than the man flames from his
own genius and subsequently
describes such as in mia, sepad
divided of a call, es over personal
y remains as a phantom and the
custom mgs lack of substance in
that definition of the race of
public opinion beings.
That's fleischmann and then it's race of man.
Just born to do with laughing man.
They want colors and the new work also
demonstrate how the very biological
pressure of maternity produces neo
nastic cristals actions as functions
observed treat for in life is the
original is over gnosis and the central
nastic figure this of the stranger
things alien six instance in the cosmos
that is breath gym and the white spies
to Jim as Edgeworth the universe pretty
desolation and and and absence a
place of Exile and the power.
In anthropological response to the
Form of the city or Genius man the word
Excel as a nastic Overton evokes a Natura
is in more of the soul Gnostics Revive
Thanks to the part of a concentration
Ori social univers in which by divergent
individual finds himself lost bora
over such in individual girls I strange
from contemporary more man with glass
as a stroll just madness is an
absence of interior.
It as carries in that con clothing scientific
posture postscript to philosophical
fragments and how can have McConnell communion.
We've got because he got this
individual over and that's not
manifested in the clamor of
enormous crowds having strange
themselves from the tracks of
the soul, open to tron, Sundance
and the last of temporal et mother
más Stafford like a shadowing
existence for as Kierkegaard we
out Riley King, Absolut a man
cannot leave science itself.
The spirit groans, he continues to last
but without spirit and fourth as the fact
of before linked cells stable relationship
with the sacred in the black land of
maternity population Sales Ghosts,
Dark life according to Kierkegaard self
description life and visited man the
board king in meds and more like creators.
Instagram times when the
foundations of being web and
impact of increasing Levels It
is the time of one man languages
​​and that's not a dots voice a
sketch roots in this exploits
web estate portraits in a all
the class for the Smith is an
exterminator Angel always works
by sae and.
Das same roots using explain expression
that without matter men as follows
for be without God in the word in this
in this epocal context in which de
tradition of the past is increasing
warning philosophizing in times to
play rule of wisdom speaker of a wisdom
speaker call to bias it and because
it does fallout beings before
Nietzsche, Kierkegaard, understood
task is to be everything as giralt the
solitary pays that reserves continuity
jure calls wisdom of the past in the
age of his oblation and consequent
limits vi by my understanding which
ancient Prophets sense deeds.
This is PKM man
of the Christian world view stands you found to the
way of thinking over is contemporary.
Thank you so much.
Thank you very much. Very nice.
Me, uh, uh.
Okay, okay,
There is return and return
a, eh, eh.
With these two presentations, what we want to
show is that the 19th century in which the novels
are inscribed, and all the historiographical
instruments that we have spoken about and that
we are going to speak about, also have a conceptual
context, and a conceptual context that we can see
from two geographical realities, from the central
reality, from the European reality, which is the
beginning of the critique of modernity.
Shall we now return to what Professor Bo five so brilliantly
raised, and Professor Claudio Cannavaro's equally
brilliant presentation on Claro, what about all these
things that were happening in the 19th century?
Colonialism, huh?
The institutionalization of the history of philosophy,
but we always see it from one perspective, we always
see it only from our European center.
But what was happening in the outskirts then?
What they're doing at the same time as we're
constructing national narratives, etc., is
a new peripheral reality, and a new critique.
to the
The foundations of that world that was already being born in the
19th century, as Mario Nich and Kierkegaard have shown, are two of the
essential foundations.
Now we will ask him about many of the criticisms
of modernity that have come after.
So, uh, what's it all about?
It's about bringing all of this together.
Obviously, right? It's more sophisticated
conceptually, but it's part of the context and
part of what's being done, because many
times we act by delegation, right?
Today we study things by delegation, things because it is our
responsibility, not because we think about them, right?
From our point of view, or because we're incapable of criticizing, huh?
A whole world, huh?
That it was shooting towards a place that Nich and
Kierkegaard, for example, could no longer see.
Therefore, these two presentations show
us all these characteristics and others
that we will discuss with anyone who wants to talk.
Well, to begin with, I wanted to ask each of
you a question, the professor mmm.
Cannavaro? Mmm, sure, huh?
This whole issue.
Colonial,
This whole issue, uh, about colonialism, uh?
Hmm.
That?
Mmm. Aposento has been found throughout the 20th century.
So, you mean, all this stuff you're saying doesn't
happen, that there's no 19th century in the periphery, huh?
Which is basically a transposition of
European issues to peripheral locations.
What do you mean, what was the outcome of that
non-situation after all of this?
And above all, what?
Was that happening in the 19th century?
The ring road was solely a reception area.
Were other things happening that later, uh,
didn't develop, etc. I mean, on the one hand, and the teacher?
Uh, yes.
Mmm mmm.
These critiques of 19th-century modernity
are basic foundations for more critical
developments of modernity that have
developed in the 20th century, such as the current.
All postmodern, linguistic, and
narrative currents since the 1960s, right?
Those are the two questions we wanted to ask you.
Isabel: I think the order would be better if Mario answered first.
That's why I think it's more relevant, and I'd like to add a question for Mario.
Mario, how
equip it, equip it?
I'm shooting in English because pisco music doesn't use "fat," huh?
Liszt Hay, the idea, says Signes, right?
This is this this is Joey powerful.
I mean you have been thinking about this.
This, uh, kind of linear development between
the intellectual to the intellectual.
Just someone who is sick? Psychological
condition at the point of you and a how
that can brain forward from modernity
to kind of virus or idea know
how play, you know.
That's more direction.
What Israel told you ask you so that's my my
question.
I you need to open the microphone.
Thinking It's me.
Judge F.
Kierkegaard and the Nietzsche.
Yes voter 16 kind of fitness as a kind of virus.
Yes, because you you were saying alien.
You know from the modernity point of you.
That guarantees position of the self,
makes intellectual That's means a San
Juan canci things and perceives and
shepherd things that the other don't don't have been.
This is kind of. Uh, uh, signs.
No same
Italian malato.
Um, so so that's that's AI foundation from the peripheral
point of you very interesting because from that point of view.
If if we carry on that interpretation week may
conclude as I said before date modernidad is
something just said to dealer which is a criticism
for modernist Bruno Latour and del
people are doing now this you see it.
So that's my point.
Yes. Kirk Factor
and the nature of it.
The task of
philosophy This reveals
What is hidden to most man
rates the real nature.
Internet as a symbol of decline.
This is the provocateur view of
materially modern that is becoming.
Which is the bottom mda
handling German romanticism to.
German romantic already
enter the eternity as in age of crisis
and vori value
For instance, an important overlay
of religion as here is the
secularization process and in
this science Kierkegaard and
Nietzsche Eh or jumps are made in all das.
Line of out
Eso far and so far as they um
criticism eternity as
said process
and the present time of being
credit the marginalist school
of the man who has born to do with
such modernity it with a
kind of a privilege.
And the very, very
very made in the current
s of the man hole as the
games able to um and feel modern.
And then, without showing a different perspective.
Okay. Yeah, yeah.
Thanks for this. Yeah.
Claudio.
Question as about the.
The links between quirke and the
nature and the postmodern
criticism of the maternity.
I think that was.
Yes. Yes.
And I don't know it's is is the um.
Of course postmodernism chose a
great del from from niche.
I don't know if the Venetian
idea of ​​the intellectual
as kind of sea as a kind
of the.
Bilingual Really
of maternity.
Uh, you have been taken over
from the postmodern critics
of a or comfortably
being.
Topic of over or being supernatural.
Okay, I know Mario.
Claudio, you answer.
Then. Now. Yes. Yes.
I did not think it was appropriate to discuss the idea of ​​modernity first and
then move on to the...
Because indeed, my comment is based on a presupposition,
let's say, of the conceptualization of philosophical
modernity, let's say, I have two issues, one is to
say, what I don't know if I said clearly, if the
periphery is not that the 19th century did not exist,
that it was different, for example, in the Río de la
Plata, the 19th century lasted until 1980.
I mean, how, how?
Why can we say this?
Because indeed, let's say, how could we put it, the dominant
conceptual paradigm, which was a kind of nineteenth-century
philosophical naturalism, lasted until that time. All the
interpretations that the local population made of themselves
and of what was happening followed this line, from the
nineteenth century, starting in the year 1000, probably
in 1840, a little later perhaps with the generation of 80,880.
That is to say, the conceptual parameters, by which the 19th
century is understood, are completely different and discontinuous.
There are elements here and there that appear from Europe, let's say, not
to put it in a certain way, in the 19th century, this one from the Río de la
Plata, for example, that there are perhaps, but there is not such a linear
relationship of that.
That is what sometimes happens, which creates great complexity for historians.
Because indeed this is the idea of ​​history that begins to
be produced locally and this goes to half of your question.
That is, uh, as these populations evolved, the class,
intellectual classes, the elite, leaders and so on, indeed
a own conceptualization began to be produced, that is, the
idea of ​​colonialism appeared with the basic idea and with
the first definition of colonialism is a political decision,
that is, the political decision says well, there are some
European institutions that were imposed and that imposition
brought a whole series of social consequences.
So, what exactly is colonialism?
In achieving political independence in order to establish local policies
appropriate to the population in which one lives, and so on.
That first issue of colonialism.
So, for almost the first half of the 20th century, and I
would say well into the 1960s, what was colonialism going to be?
It will be an object of analysis for all social sciences, for the history of
sociology.
Literature is included, where an attempt will be made to identify
the political problem that would allow this political situation
to be changed or transformed into a cultural dimension.
And well, in all of that, another discussion does indeed come
in, let's say it has to do with new things that are appearing,
such as technological evolution, industrialization,
things for which local populations had no answers, except to copy the European
response.
And that brought in a way a second orientation of
colonialism which was called the postcolonial
perspective, where the object is no longer to
try to identify a particular political group or
policy, but to try to identify and isolate cultural
elements that allow for critical effectiveness.
Where classical colonialism or the classical definition could not.
And all of that has a series of derivatives such as identity
politics, ideas about native communities,
as they are called, etc., etc., let's say.
And all of that now has a third twist, so to speak,
with the emergence of the new climate
regime, that is, true colonialism.
Today, the periphery is not related to a political group,
although colonialism still exists in that sense.
But the real colonialism of today is the Anthropocene, that is,
the real colonialism and the real scourge that they will suffer in the years to
come.
The peripheral areas will be the new climate regime.
That is the real, let's say, to put it bluntly, the real
enemy, let's say, of peripheral societies.
So that's it, in short, if you want a bit of a
projection into the 21st century, I've somewhat
grossly simplified, let's say, the 19th-century
perspective to bring this 20th-century problem back.
No?
Well, thank you very much.
Thank you both very much, eh?
It has been very important to have this
table because it gives a conceptual
meaning to the activity and above all
places the narratives within the basic
problems to which they belong.
We often forget that reality is a whole and
that it is difficult to separate it, and
sometimes we get stuck in our own things,
in our own tasks, in our own issues, without
keeping in mind these fundamental questions
that make us understand reality in a much more complex way.