Search

Mariana Enriquez y Luciano Lamberti aprovechan la sensibilidad ecológica generalizada en nuestro tiempo para dotarse de nuevos dispositivos disruptivos con los que introducir el terror sobrenatural en sus cuentos. Transfiguran la casa encantada en espacios naturales, que mantienen las mismas características y reacciones que esta, pero contemporizan mejor con las preocupaciones del lector. Una naturaleza hostil, porque ha sido previamente maltratada, como un riachuelo contaminado o un bosque abandonado y sucio, funciona como casa encantada y como monstruo, en tanto que expresión simbólica del tabú sobre el que se ha asentado un desarrollo económico que ha ignorado a tantos damnificados.

Todos los cuentos fantásticos de Mariana Enriquez, menos uno, están protagonizados por fantasmas. En muchos de estos, hay una posesión. Con este recurso, propio del terror sobrenatural, la autora construye un ambicioso discurso social en torno a la incomprensión de la víctima. Obvia cuál es el mecanismo con el que el fantasma posee el cuerpo, para centrar sus relatos en cómo queda marcada socialmente la víctima. La posesión le permite un aproximación más audaz al tema: en torno a cómo es reconocida y tratada la víctima por los demás, al confundirse en el personaje poseído el agredido y el agresor. En un género tan deudor de las convenciones, el narrador se desvía de las expectativas del lector para centrarse en las circunstancias que permiten la posesión y las circunstancias que se derivan de esta, con esta segunda agresión que la incomprensión y el abandono de la víctima provocan.

María Zambrano positions her poetic reasoning based on the coordinates of Ortega’s vital reasoning: she assimilates it at first, without subjecting it to a rigorous critical analysis, and she later distances herself to bring her poetic reasoning closer to more vitalist positions. On this journey of poetic reasoning, until it finds its definitive location, its metaphysical foundation of the analogy of novel characters as a representation of existential ethics is paradigmatic: in Ortega its development is insufficient, but she (more sensitive to literature) is capable of giving the metaphor more depth, with a bolder analysis, thanks to her understanding of the genre of the novel, which owes nothing to the theory of her master’s novel. She accepts Ortega’s premise that we are unfinished. But she takes the conclusions further to mark the terrain of her poetic reasoning, which rebels against the sacrifice of life to the being: Faced with life as a project, she understands, from Benito Pérez Galdós’ character Nina, that what we have to do to finish doing is not pre-determined. She rejects a programmatic life.

This bibliographic review of academic research on emoji reveals how the bulk of studies accepts it as a language but do not develop detailed linguistic analysis that could support this claim: they accept the clues provided by the initial studies, as if the scientific community had already reached such a consensus. However, the truth is that the fields in which emoji have generated the greatest academic interest (computer science, psychology and cognitive science) have considered the study of their linguistic nature a minor issue. Therefore, research on emoji has been growing over the years, widening the scope of its contributions, but with a common core made up of few basic notions about its linguistic condition that has important blind spots, in which Linguistics hasn’t done (generally) its work to place it in this new context for communication that the digital environments represent, despite the supports provided by multimodality and visual language theory. From these two disciplines, some authors have boldly suggested the emoji’s status as a gesture. However, to analyse its linguistic nature and behaviour, it is more accurate to understand the emoji, not as a gesture, but as a simplified representation of a gesture, without the unique features that a personal gesture has. The emoji seems to be the tool that, with fewer resources, best ensures that the interlocutor can understand the intentionality with which the sender has written the message.

Ortega presents his metaphysics as a set of images around the novel as a metaphor for life. But he confuses the subject and object in the references in his explanation of life as action: In his aesthetics, he didn’t study enough the fictional characters (as autonomous within the fiction, not from the novelist). Instead, Zambrano has a theory about the fictional character, so she can think better about the analogy, she can see more aspects. For example: an ethical proposal on the status of projective of person (neutral, without a moral valuation in Ortega): For Zambrano it is a reprehensible attitude, the sacrifice of life to a reducing preconceived scheme. What she calls «novelty» in his Reading of Galdós’ Nina.

Ortega, aunque comprime su metafísica hasta formularla con su “Yo soy yo y mi circunstancia”, no escribe apenas de esa circunstancia: de su condición y posibles aspectos. Del binomio con que explica la vida trabaja solo en la reacción del individuo, convertida su propuesta metafísica en una ética que confía en las fuerzas del sujeto para desarrollar su proyecto vital en cualquier entorno. Aún es de día, que publica Miguel Delibes en 1949, con la España de posguerra de fondo, puede leerse como una réplica a esta ética que Ortega llama de la ilusión: Su protagonista, ante una circunstancia abiertamente hostil, es incapaz de desarrollar el programa que quiere para su vida. La trama funciona como planteamiento de una ética que recalcula las posibilidades del individuo para realizarse en un entorno adverso.

In the 2008-2009 school year "Education for Citizenship" is incorporated into the curriculum of the ESO (one session per week). Inclusion is very controversial: from the political sphere, it is feared the potential burden dogmatic. After three years, the dispute seems settled. Now the question is to meet the high damaged by the educational reform: the subject of Ethics (4º ESO). In many regions decreased from two sessions to one session a week. With half of its content focused on civic education. My proposal is an analysis of the causes and consequences of disregard for Ethics (as philosophically) in the school curriculum. The causes stem from the general inability to distinguish the ethical and moral: to understand the different levels (one philosophical, the other not) that moves each. The first consequence is the inability to motivate the student a genuine ethical reflection.

There is a general feeling of the end of the classical intellectual. At the same time there are new less restrictive opinion forums on the Internet. There is a suspicious reaction lambasting these new voices. On the opposite side, we can analyze how the digital intellectual can defend themselves against the dangers which threatened their autonomy. In this task, to draw the profile of the new intellectual, I propose a reading of Gombrowicz's reflection on the ways of culture and its display.

The first studies in Philosophy that studied digital technology did not specify the characteristics of its various technical applications or instruments. They looked at the virtual reality and used the metaphor of immersion to study the set of all technological developments, as had been done before with the novel. Thus, Internet is misunderstood by many experts as virtuality (next to Baudrillard), rather than linking its hypertext system closer to other theories like those proposed by Deleuze and Guattari or Bourriaud.

RESUMEN: Tanto el ensayo, como género literario, como el ensayo español, en su concreción histórica, son temas de estudio con un vigor extraordinario en la crítica contemporánea. Como posibilidad estilística para una reflexión que renuncia a ser estrictamente sistemática, este trabajo apuntala en la literatura en español sus orígenes en Ortega y Gasset porque, a pesar de haber otros precedentes destacados, anteriores a Ortega, con el escritor madrileño el ensayo toma conciencia de ser forma de un nuevo planteamiento filosófico que se justifica, precisamente, en su dinamicidad frente al sistema. ABSTRACT: The essay (as literary genre) and the Spanish essay (in its historical specificity) are subjects of study with a special force in contemporary criticism. This paper examines the origins of the essay in Spanish literature in Ortega y Gasset, understanding it as a stylistic form of reflection that is not strictly systematic. Despite the existence of important predecessors, with Ortega the essay comes to recognize itself as the form of a new philosophical approach that is justified precisely in its dynamism.

Ha querido entenderse internet como un medio de comunicación de masas más. Se ha tomado como cómplice también de la hiperrealidad, cambiándole a Baudrillard sus referentes, confundiéndolo con la realidad virtual, sin hacer caso de su estructura hipertextual. Pero, a diferencia de los otros medios, internet incrementa enormemente las fuentes de la información: tantas como usuarios. Con lo que, frente al relato consensuado por los pocos medios anteriores sobre los derechos humanos, que los había anquilosado, arrinconado, la edición digital colapsa esos derechos positivos, volviéndolos de nuevo acciones, actualizándolos.

Eduardo Nicol estudia la razón histórica que en 1924 Ortega incorpora a su epistemología: el historicismo con que endereza su vitalismo inicial. Pero en su crítica deja fuera la filosofía del arte, cómo Ortega hace de las vanguardias el síntoma de un tiempo nuevo, al entender que la defensa de la autonomía del arte de los jóvenes artistas responde -en sintonía con una nueva sensibilidad vital a comienzos del siglo XX- a su comprensión del arte como intrascendente. La tesis que defiendo es que, con su noción de generación, Ortega apoya su análisis del arte nuevo en su condición de producto histórico, sobreentendido un telos para la historia del arte que lo coloca más cerca de la meta (el arte puro) que el arte romántico, al que lo opone.

El 98 que plantea Ortega : bisagra de sensibilidades en el tanteo de generaciones

Copyright of Laguna: Revista de Filosofía is the property of Universidad de La Laguna and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Endoxa is the property of Editorial UNED and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

On the basis of the counterweight that Ortega finds in the contradictory life of Goethe, he proposes a new definition of biography: a triple connection between circumstance, vocation and chance. Ortega y Gasset introduces biography into his philosophical proposal: from his ontology, as drama, as literary genre, with a certain connotation of construction (which must later be decipher-red). His idea of biography is intended to be a more daring proposal than Idealism's idea of being, because it includes the environment within the self. As Aranguren wrote: it is like an ethic of being within a metaphysics of our life, which Ortega conceives as a task. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]