For those interested we think the key conflict in democratic decision-making week in the faculty of Social and peculiar mode of resolution, we made a great learning. For those who think from a philosophical pragmatist register and let us accompany the figure of John Dewey as a sideman, episodes of these days we become somewhat obscure, vague, almost elusive.
not from political science, nor from sociology, let less political philosophy should dull the capacity building of the conflict. The pragmatic attitude proposes closer ties between this conflict and emotion that gives life and existence. Once we do not give conservatism ignore the conflict and not want to admit a nostalgic treat, opens a possible dimension to link the conflict with emotion. Readers know that is not easy to encrypt a kind of pragmatist theory of conflict. We can even agree that it is not necessary, but the truth is that the problem exists and turns on us demanding that we take part in the conversation. Try to work this point while maintaining a pragmatic attitude. I will recovering the discussion about the antagonisms that Dewey held an evening with Jane Addams at Hull House, this magnificent public space intervention Addams founded in Chicago with Ellen Gates Starr. In that discussion, seemingly abstract, lies across a chance to re-enroll the conflict in a different register. Dewey, Hegel still modern and at the same time, argued against Christianity Addams condition, but irreducible, the less vigorous of conflicts between institutional forms. Addams, however, believed that these antagonisms were unreal, that showed "just the injection of attitudes and reactions" delaying the understanding of the meaning of action and human behavior. The impact of this conversation in the philosophical interpretation of Dewey was intense. Led him, after a night of rushing thoughts to himself, to understand the sayings of Addams, a reformulation of the dialectic by which the unit should no longer be seen as the reconciliation of opposites, but that would be useful to perceive opposites as the unity in its growth. This has inevitably lead pragmatists practices if it is understood that the interests that are necessary to save, always mutual interests and not private individuals, even in the posing of a conflict, however strong it was. And this leads to a radicalization liberal dimension of democracy, yet, in strict philosophical terms, allows us to escape from the metaphorical reference to the existence of an "up" and "down", so common in the lexicon of political orthodoxy. A more radical consequence is the possibility of exploring the denial, thanks to this unity of opposites, the discursive supremacy between reformers and reformed, that is, between the political entities that are participants in a reform process. Borges, curiously or not, and no apparent political involvement, holding a status similar criticism against the dialectic, valuing the poetic form. This denial of the dialectic, with the presence of Dewey and Borges, serve my purpose to think of conflict as a consecration of the plurality and imagine claim a new lexicon, always cooperative, which may well be that of a political poetry recursive zigzag rich and full of extravagance.
When we look at Social making from this perspective we are close to nothing, a conflict that escalated without considering the interests of anyone but those who provoked and a violent resolution, irrational and excessive, which, however, was crowned with an undoubted success. Those who carried out a conflict of this type achieved everything they wanted, from highest to lowest and most absurdly banal as the possibility of parties in a building that reported by the precariousness and danger of their facilities. On the other hand, the logic of the authorities really inexplicable, that authority was never, that was politically ineffective and finished granting all after seven weeks of taking, as if he had done the second day, everything was different. The only concern of the authorities was, at all times, not be run by left and they were and over, as a aesthetics revenge, the dean and his assistants in the management showed ending the conflict in the street, as a kind of reconquest public class faculty.
In this conflict, unfortunately, no new players emerge, it generated a different democratic framework, no progress was made in the discussion about the academic quality and we all filled with anxiety. The hope is never empty, go for this interpretation to begin filling the air of arguments.
0 comments:
Post a Comment