Tag: EV
-
A questão restante é se há alguma diferença entre terra (Erde) e deuses (Gott) e, da mesma forma, alguma diferença entre céu (Himmel) e mortais (Tod). Se cada par consiste apenas em ocultação (Verbergung) ou não ocultação (Entbergung), podemos abandonar com segurança o Geviert de Heidegger e retornar ao dualismo simples da análise inicial da…
-
É que fundar é determinar o indeterminado. Mas esta operação não é simples. Quando “a” determinação se exerce, ela não se contenta em dar uma forma, de informar matérias sob a condição de categorias. Alguma coisa do fundo sobe à superfície, e sobe sem tomar forma, insinuando-se, antes de tudo, entre as formas, existência autônoma…
-
Ora é precisamente Heidegger que Lévinas coloca o mais longe possível do seu próprio pensamento e dos ensinamentos bíblicos. (175) A leitura que propõe é singular. Bem longe de distinguir entre a tradição ontológica e a crítica radical que Heidegger apresenta, ele considera pelo contrário a sua obra como o local onde se junta e…
-
I We live in a revolution — we of the West — and have been living in one for several centuries. We are naming its central agency when we call it the scientific-technological revolution. Having begun as a “provincially” European event, it has by now become global. In its progress it reshapes the external conditions…
-
II My contention here is, to repeat it once more, that the theoretical beginnings – what we may call the ontological breakthrough occurring at the onset of the modern age and laying the foundations on which the edifice of modern science was reared – was the all important event. To understand this event historically, we…
-
III How this came about is a story involving many things besides the history of science. The movement that remade thought from its foundations was not an isolated event but had a background commensurate in breadth with its own dimension in depth. We cannot go here into the manifold aspects of the crisis that attended…
-
IV The new cosmology called for a new physics but did not provide one itself. It offered a new image of the universe but no explanation of it. It showed, by an ingenious combination of hypothesis, observation, and mathematical construction, how the macrocosmos “looks” and what motions its bodies describe, but not why they do…
-
V All this is far from obvious. In fact, all appearances are on the side of the opposite, Aristotelian view. In our common experience, bodies do come to rest when the force propelling them ceases to act: the wagon does stop moving when no longer pulled or pushed; and the pulling or pushing, when done…
-
VI It only remains to draw one last inference so as to have this account of the conceptual revolution terminate in a full-fledged mechanics of nature. To use abridged labels, it means completing the Galilean with the Newtonian record. There recurred in our account one term which is obviously crucial but is not a geometrical…
-
VII After this analytical summary of the direct conceptual content of the theoretical revolution in dynamics, a brief metaphysical evaluation of it is in order. We said at one point that what the innovation was originally about was not the time-honored principle of causality per se, but the conception of change. We must now add…