by Alessandro Pascale
Edgar Morin is one of the minds "post-Marxist" certainly the most interesting political movement for curriculum and variety of disciplinary approaches. His life also, as we would like to say he is very symbolic of the evolution of the twentieth century, although in contrast to what concerns the last two decades, when coming off the numerous critics of the Marxian philosophy he chose to return to retrieve it with a critical eye fighting the degrading and irrational abandonment which risked being left behind.
Recovering Marx but not in the Marxist perspective (that is, a doctrine and systematized absorbing), but Marx (ie accepting the logic of his thought open evolving, capable of continuous changes and improvements), avoiding any kind of dogma, according to messianic certainly detrimental impact on the long term. But Morin
on these concepts is not particularly illuminating, essentially repeating speeches and arguments already heard from most of the authors 'serious' that after a certain period of time you re-approach the German author.
In reality there are some exquisitely unique that it is worth emphasizing the collection of essays by Morin:
"We need to preserve and revolutionize revolutionize conservation ' namely "the essential finding that the revolution needs to maintain not only our biological beings, but also the nature, the biosphere, the world's diversity, cultures who want to live, the legacy of the past contains the seeds of the future. "We
that is in front of the simple concept that any message is reduced to what it has meant" the universe red "of the twentieth century, now can not re-casting dall'imprescindibilità sharing a link with environmental concerns. At the bottom was already a connection with the doctrine of apparent decrease of Serge Latouche, but the news is the flip side: "we must revolutionize to preserve "is the obvious consideration that there is no possibility of earthly salvation without a radical change, revolutionary precisely, the global economic system and what drives him: the human mentality. The real revolution must take place in man short, and is not granted a pass to Morin, giving he (rightly in the opinion of the undersigned) the total freedom to decide how it will be the future world, then away from all forms of socio-economic determinism. Men can change things, you just have to figure out if they really want, if we want that awareness. Inevitable for myself the relationship between this step and the ethics communication structured by Karl Otto Apel. In fact, essential to create that global citizenship is talking about Morin try to establish a universal system of values \u200b\u200bacceptable to anyone, and is able to empower every single person on the planet.
comes into play a second interesting question the work of Morin: his renewed anthropological concept which leads to exclude certain one-dimensionality of human beings (Marcuse dear you have gone out of fashion!), At the expense of diversity that can be summarized under the term "homo sapiens-Demens. The man that can not be considered only in its prosaic activities (technical, labor, materials) but we must also take account of his poetic activity (the feast, play, dance, joy, love, ecstasy, imagination, adventure), not the perspective of darkness, but to keep them into account and ennoble even when the occasion (ie, not causing harm to another) of individual achievement.
"We need to introduce the mystery of politics, art the most uncertain of all."
Rinobilitare policy goes from here: a human appearance, restoring it exits the mere administration of materiality. This Vendola in Italy has understood very well. And maybe it's the first time this has happened to the left without falling into symbols messianism and now out of time. It 'clear that the uncertainties regarding this concept of politics are still evident, but it is certainly valuable to be able to finally capture something that the Right have exploited unconsciously last thirty years.
The condition of the intellectuals in the USSR under Stalin.
It 's a disturbing question: why intellectuals have not responded to Stalin? Not just about those Russians, who could more or less forced to be obliged to remain silent, but also of most of those in Europe, most of which was awakened by the "dogmatic slumber" in 1956 with the de-Stalinization.
Morin's answer is that Stalinism, in its mix of necessitarismo messianesismo and was perfectly suited to the abstract theory and absolute, one for which the idea is worth more than anything concrete. That then why socialism is the ultimate goal for which you can think of sacrificing a few thousands if not millions of people. Aristotle probably did not think the search for good practice by blending and contemplative activity could lead to aberrant results much. But you probably do not even think Marx. Lenin perhaps yes, he had guessed. But then when you're Stalin on his deathbed, some things can just cast ...
"Politics is the only real art, and in itself represents a contradiction. " I explain this not because I want to invite you to read, but I found it really brilliant!
0 comments:
Post a Comment