Search

El presente artículo analiza el enfrentamiento entre la obra de Suárez y la de Berkeley. Suárez es un representante de la corriente jesuita de la Contrarreforma comprometida en una polémica con Jaime I de Inglaterra sobre la fundación y la legitimidad del poder de derecho divino en la Defensio fidei catholicae adversus de anglicana secta. La teoría de Berkeley, obispo anglicano ortodoxo y conservador que se ocupa de la obediencia pasiva fiel al imperativo paulino según el cual « el que resiste a la autoridad civil resiste al orden que Dios ha establecido» está desarrollada en Sobre la obediencia pasiva. Tal enfrentamiento permite reformular la cuestión de la base del consentimiento a la ley, así como la de los límites que le corresponde o no al ser razonable y libre, poder aplicarlo. La comparación se realiza a partir del análisis de 1) Los límites del poder transferido por la comunidad política al soberano; 2) las condiciones para la desobediencia y 3) la necesidad ontológica de la resistencia.

En su Tratado sobre los principios del conocimiento humano, George Berkeley ofrece una serie de argumentos cuyo objetivo es criticar la tesis materialista. Mi propósito en este artículo es reconstruir y analizar en detalle estos argumentos. Dado que la crítica de Berkeley al materialismo es, fundamentalmente, una crítica al materialismo representacionalista de John Locke, empezaré este artículo explicando cuáles son las ideas básicas de la propuesta de Locke.

In Berkeley’s writings the topic of light is discussed in two different ways, within a theory of perception and within a metaphysics of nature of a Platonic stamp. In his first work, the original Essay for a New Theory of Vision (1709), light and colours are regarded as condition and object of vision; they are examined as contents of visual perception distinct from tangible perception. Light will be dealt with in a completely different manner in Berkeley’s last work, Siris (1744), in which a spiritualistic reading of the natural world is superimposed on modern science in general and on Newtonian physics in particular. In Siris, light (or invisible fire) is the instrument by which the causal activity of divine Intellect orders and permeates the natural world. A detailed analysis of the topic of light in the two aforementioned contexts shows inconsistencies and strained interpretations which derive from the apologetic use of the theory of vision in Berkeley’s early immaterialism and from the multi-layered and confused speculations of his late Siris. On the whole, Berkeley conceives light within the idealistic frame inherited from Platonic metaphysics of light; however, the specific themes examined in the Essay for a New Theory of Vision and in Siris derive from acquisitions of modern science, and are recast within a spiritualistic interpretation which intended both to neutralize scientific ideas through their phenomenistic reading and to exploit them for apologetic ends.

Existe já uma grande quantidade de literatura dedicada à presença na filosofia inicial de Berkeley de alguns assuntos tipicamente platônicos (arquétipos, o problema da mente de Deus, a relação entre ideias e coisas, etc.). Baseados em alguns desses escritos, nas próprias palavras de Berkeley, assim como no exame de alguns elementos da tradição platônica num amplo sentido, sugiro que, longe de serem apenas tópicos isolados, livremente espalhados nos primeiros escritos de Berkeley, eles formam uma perfeita rede de aspectos, atitudes e modos de pensar platônicos, e que, por mais alusivos ou ambíguos que esses elementos platônicos possam parecer, eles constituem um todo coerente e complexo, desempenhando um papel importante na formação da própria essência do pensamento de Berkeley. Em outras palavras, sugiro que, dadas algumas das ideias apresentadas em suas primeiras obras, foi de certo modo inevitável para George Berkeley, em virtude da lógica interna do desenvolvimento de seu pensamento, chegar a uma obra tão abertamente platônica e especulativa como Siris (1744).

This paper discusses the dispute between G. Berkeley and I. Newton concerning the validity of classical mechanics. These two engaged in a discussion about infinitely small quantities --- infinitesimals --- which were used in differential and integral equations by Leibniz and Newton. Infinitesimals were both equal to zero and at the same time different from zero. The standard view is that Newton was right in defending classical mechanics. But if we accept a narrow sense of rationality --- as a procedure conforming to logical rules --- then Berkeley was right, for there are no numbers at the same time equal to and different from zero. The problem of infinitesimals was resolved in the 19th century, when the notion of limit was strictly defined. Seen in the light of this, Berkeley appears as rational, and Newton as pragmatic in his determination to preserve a promising physical theory.

Existe já uma grande quantidade de literatura dedicada à presença na filosofia inicial de Berkeley de alguns assuntos tipicamente platônicos (arquétipos, o problema da mente de Deus, a relaçáo entre ideias e coisas, etc.). Baseados em alguns desses escritos, nas próprias palavras de Berkeley, assim como no exame de alguns elementos da tradiçáo platônica num amplo sentido, sugiro que, longe de serem apenas tópicos isolados, livremente espalhados nos primeiros escritos de Berkeley, eles formam uma perfeita rede de aspectos, atitudes e modos de pensar platônicos, e que, por mais alusivos ou ambíguos que esses elementos platônicos possam parecer, eles constituem um todo coerente e complexo, desempenhando um papel importante na formaçáo da própria essência do pensamento de Berkeley. Em outras palavras, sugiro que, dadas algumas das ideias apresentadas em suas primeiras obras, foi de certo modo inevitável para George Berkeley, em virtude da lógica interna do desenvolvimento de seu pensamento, chegar a uma obra táo abertamente platônica e especulativa como Siris (1744).

No Tratado, Hume procura investigar as causas da crença nos objetos exteriores, admitindo ser impossível provar se os mesmos existem ou náo. Sua análise consistirá na investigaçáo da origem da inteligibilidade das noções de continuidade e distinçáo dos objetos sensíveis, em última instância, a crença do senso comum na continuidade e distinçáo das próprias percepções. Este texto pretende mostrar como essa discussáo humeana é um diálogo direto com a filosofia berkeleyana, a defesa humeana da crença na matéria implicando inicialmente uma certa aceitaçáo da filosofia de Berkeley, para, na seqüência, representar uma dissensáo direta com o seu princípio fundamental: ser é ser percebido. Tais colocações têm, entre outras, a finalidade de argumentar que Berkeley exerce um papel central na filosofia humeana, nesse caso como seu interlocutor direto, e que a compreensáo desse papel é parte obrigatória de um melhor esclarecimento do problema da objetividade em Hume.

Beyond the Soundtrack: Representing Music in Cinema (edited by Daniel Goldmark, Lawrence Kramer and Richard Leppert, Berkeley, University of California Press, 2007, viii-324 pp.) offers sixteen essays of various authors about film music. These papers were presented in 2004 in a study congress at the University of Minnesota. In introducing the book, the editors assert an assumption, today broadly accepted: indeed they affirm, that music has traditionally been regarded as a subordinate element in cinematographic text: film music literature still has a marginal position in the much larger field of film studies which focuses on image, narrative, film history. In this theoretical and historiographic context, the expression “Beyond the Soundtrack” is meant to be more than a title: it is the manifesto of a conceptual shift. We can summarize this change in reconsidering the importance of film music, in order to understand a movie not only as a visual, but also as a musical medium. The change of paradigm brings renewed questions and completely new issues. If we abandon the assumption, at this point obsolete, that film music has a mere functional role, it will be necessary to ask not how to conceptualize the use of music in film, but rather how the film conceptualizes music: how films imagine music, how films represent music as an artistic and social phenomenon, and how films position music as an integral parts of a fictional world. Such questions aim to consider film music not as an atmospheric expedient, but «as an agent, a force, and an object engaged in ongoing negotiations with image, narrative, and context», as the editors assert at the very beginning of their book.

In the Treatise, Hume intends to investigate the causes that induce us to believe in the existence of the body, admitting it is possible to prove if such a thing exists or not. His analysis will consist in investigating the origin of the intelligibility of the notions of continuity and distinction of sensible objects, which is, to say, the belief of the common sense in the continuity and distinction of its own perceptions. This paper aims to demonstrate that this humean discussion is a direct dialogue with Berkeley. Hume’s defense of the belief in matter initially implicating in accepting, to some degree, Berkeley’s philosophy to, further on, turn into a direct opposition to his fundamental principle: esse is percipi. Such statements have, among others, the purpose of arguing that Berkeley plays a central role in humean philosophy, in this particular case, as his direct, immediate interlocutor, and that the understanding of this role is an obligatory part in making the objectivity problem, in Hume, more clear.

The article is devoted to the problem of identification of the Kant’s and Berkeley’s philosophical systems. The author considers reasons of the origin of Kant-Berkeley question and considers some versions of its completion.

Ornamenty tworzone z ludzkich mas na stadionach i kabaretowej scenie, o których pisał w 1927 roku Siegfried Kracauer, są w jego tekście wieloznaczną metaforą spotkania nowoczesnego życia i technologicznego Ratio – miejscem ich wzajemnej próbnej transformacji, która ma zadecydować o tym, czy modernitas jako projekt ma przed sobą przyszłość. Choreografia Busby Berkeleya z okresu New Dealu jest intensyfikacją tego fenomenu. Obecna w Gold Diggers of 1933 i Footlight Parade estetyka fordowskiego funkcjonalizmu wyrastająca z praktyki „taśmy produkcyjnej” przemawia do odbiorcy językiem odnowionej pitagorejsko-neoplatońskiej „mistyki kosmosu”, w którym Eros kosmologiczny staje się imieniem społecznej kooperacji. Ta demokratyczna „ekonomia libidinalna”, jako podtekst choreografii Berkeleya, nie uszła uwagi Sherrie Levine, która stosując wobec jego oeuvre postmodernistyczną strategię zawłaszczenia, wykorzystała stworzoną przezeń estetykę do rozwinięcia własnego projektu – zakwestionowania wyobrażonej granicy między twórczą jednostką i zdyscyplinowaną społecznością, modernistyczną sztuką i zestandaryzowaną przemysłową produkcją.

OCASIONALISMO Y MODERNIDAD: BERKELEY,LECTOR CRÍTICO DE MALEBRANCHE

The article offers information about the move of the East Asian Library at the University of California at Berkeley to its own building in March 2008. Developments in the history of the Library are noted, including its founding by John Fryer, who left his private collection of Chinese literature to the department of Oriental Languages and Literature in 1896. The construction of the Library's building was financed by Starr-Foundation donor Cornelius Vander Starr, an alumnus of the University.

Sin resumen

Sin resumen