In "Story of a library, a new trial, Thomas Abraham, the author of" frictions "keeps track of dazzled by his own philosophy and travels, bringing life and work of the elect, 2,500 years of thought, scholarship, and creative display theoretical obsession.
"Philosophers are not ideologues. They are creators of systems of thought ", says Thomas Abraham . "The political effects of his writings are somewhat different," says .
By: Gustavo Varela, "N", May 22, 2010
To a philosopher write a history of philosophy is more of an emotional event that an academic decision. Faced with the task of addressing 2500 years of history of thought is not only work but also perseverance and a sense of dedication and personal gratitude to this story. In one piece of old memories meet, current interests, read books again after many years, youth and maturity selective beliefs. It is the story of the laboratory where the philosopher built his own office, an emotional and intellectual geography exposes their innermost tracks.
Therefore, this history of philosophy who has just released Thomas Abraham is entitled "History of a Library" (South America), a chronological journey that begins with Plato and ends with Nietzsche. "The difference is that I write based on my experience and from reading my books," "says in this interview with Ñ. "The presentation of systems of thought of the philosophers stands theoretical composition, which lines of force permeate the text, the way they were received by me, the circumstances of his reading, and its impact on my thinking . But undoubtedly the main job is to convey, as accurately as possible, the novelty of a philosophy in his time and place. "
Abraham writes this story with the sweat of a blacksmith and the emotional power of a rock musician. It is, then, scholarship and strength, theoretical and creative display obsession. Thus his reading of the history of philosophy that does not suffer from osteoporosis, which orders the philosophers under a rigid and hollow concept.
Thomas Abraham writes short texts, accurate, sometimes mixing the philosopher's life and work, looking for problems rather than principles, all under direct language and with no assumptions or winks.
- What was the reason that led him to write a history of philosophy?
-had long wanted to write a book of philosophy in the strict sense. Recent years had published two books on literature, postcards and Friction Situations, and books that compile my articles and current affairs in Argentina and political philosophy. I started to write short essays on the Web philosophy. In the "Seminar on Thursday," my reference group of philosophical inquiry, had worked for two years the work of Gilles Deleuze, which resulted in the book The machine Deleuze and a comprehensive course on issues of philosophy. I posted on my website and my blog work on Kant, Rousseau and Kierkegaard. One day I said I wanted to write more and I saw I could take the time needed for the writing of a bit of philosophy I know from my memories of reading in the company of the great masters.
-references are continuously private lives of the philosophers. How do you understand the relationship between an author's life and work?
"Actually there is not always because they are not always significant. I do not separate life and work and neither do between text and history. Such divisions impoverished thought. The image of the rhizome is what it is. Draw connections. The interest of these depends on how they perform. It is interesting learn about aspects of the life of Hegel, for example, its efforts to earn a living, humiliation she suffered in the town houses where he worked as a tutor and was treated for "servant", which is the definite place in your Phenomenology mistranslated the word for "slave." With other philosophers biographies traverse the text, as in the case of Augustine and Rousseau. The misanthropy of Schopenhauer, Spinoza marginal life, the political work of Ockham or importantes.Considero Machiavelli are also the best introductions to philosophy are not the classic textbooks but the biographies written by authors with knowledge of philosophy and narrative talent. Is gender most powerful literary teaching today. Combines conceptual precision with the story of a story, ie what is usually called imagination.
-You say that "part of the pregnancy of philosophy in our culture is that we have inherited platitudes." What are they?
"There are different kinds of platitudes. Part of our vocabulary is Greek, from the word architecture to the word democracy. But there is also a commonplace abuse of philosophy from those who might want to give some luster. I remember when Senator Eduardo Menem during the eighties, in a speech in Congress to reject the draft Terragno to create a joint venture with SAS, Aerolineas Argentinas and the Swedish-flag defended the company with those extracted from the texts of Hegel. To not insist Mariano Grondona whose portrait is one of my books. Just as the President of the nation at the Congress of Philosophy at San Juan, saying that for Hegel it was very important. O Peron, in his inaugural speech of the famous congress of philosophy of 48, which stated that existentialism was a asquismo. The best was Menem who at least knew to laugh at himself and confessed that he had read Socrates. Then there are the men of culture who speak of the thing itself like a ball and despise the philosophers from a pose machoide that aims to show what's behind each of them. Talk about it in a chapter called "Sodomy and philosophy."
-After traveling over two thousand years of thinking, is there anything unique original in the eyes of a philosopher?
"No philosopher who has marked the history of Western thought that is not original. Being original is not born from an egg. Philosophers are as mammals and children as anyone of his time. But if they had not thought counter to the authorities of his time, nobody would have drawn attention, either in its present or posthumously, nothing would left of their works. Philosophers are not ideologues. They are creators of systems of thought. The political effects of his writings are distributed on both sides of a trench called social class divide. To say that Descartes laid the foundations of capitalism or the depredation of natural life, is a remnant of the way they taught philosophy behind the iron curtain moved to our country by the ideologues of our Iron Guard in the departments of philosophy and national socialism. Just learn about the persecution suffered by the sect of the "Cartesian" in Europe to measure the effects of thought subversive of its members to the power of the time. Not to mention the course content "bourgeois" Kant, perhaps the philosopher who paved the way for contemporary philosophy from Kierkegaard, to Marx and Nietzsche, and atheism existential thought and modern skepticism. To not insist on slavery behind the dialogues of Plato and Aristotle's treatises or Heidegger's Nazism, and Stalinism of Sartre. Heidegger's Nazism or invalidate the special course on Nietzsche issued during the Third Reich or the text on the ghost of Stalin makes a dent in an admirable work Being and Nothingness. On one side is mistakenly believe that the philosophies are worldviews that determine political developments, it is not true. Determined unless the increases in the price of potatoes and taxes on imports of tea, as in French and American revolutions. On the other hand, is to ignore, on behalf of a pan-ideological, the task of thinking of the great philosophers subverts cultural norms.
- How much influence the different interpretations of a thinker at the time of writing about his work?
"It's very strange and varied our relationship with philosophers and philosophy texts. You can refer to a philosopher having read only, or in chunks. It happened with Kant. Educated in environments that divided philosophical philosophy among those who were with the slogan Kantian peace and administration and those who were adept at the ardor of the flame Nietzsche, took sides with the latter until I did was read Kant not long ago and discovered a genius. What I do not depart from Nietzsche, but he added another thought with which rub and strengthens our understanding of the twilight of the idols of our time. Read a few pages of The Critique of Practical Reason and The Genealogy of Morals, every morning, gives us energy for the day. Usually philosophers know indirectly. For other philosophers, for readers of their works, performers, or the chances of life. Story on the front pages of my book how I read my first book of philosophy at fifteen, History of Philosophy by Will Durant, and I was fascinated by the engraving of Gustave Doré (maybe it was a cut in the famous painting by David ) of Socrates in his cell by lifting the cup of hemlock to the prayer of his young disciples, and the words that accompanied it said: "The death of a martyr of thought." I was shocked. He knew what he was a martyr, religions were full of them, but did not know you could die and sacrifice for something called "thinking." An English teacher recommended me the first dialogue Plato, and then found out what had killed Socrates. Had left the cave, and it is paid. Story then I did the same, I left my cave, especially since my cave mouth was a stutterer, and I got to talk despite my oral dysfunction. Had to talk to outside, and not to swallow every word, and do it in the imperative tone and challenging teacher Socrates. That decided my vocation and helped me in my healing.
- How do you choose what deserves to be told of each author?
-How do I choose what I'm interested in any text. It is a matter of look. What deserves to be read is not always what the author considers it meritorious. There are teachers of reading, and I have appointed. I can add others as Witold Gombrowicz who taught me to study and pay attention to the system poses the representatives of high culture. This is what developed in the essay on Aira and Piglia in friction. There must be something that catches my attention and then I plug in my brain cells and let it do its work incoming according to the synapses and circuits that do not control completely. It is thought as you type. Anyway there are all very hard preparatory work that takes years of study, research, reading cards and marginal notes. The thought is woven by little. And so what deserves to be read and written is not always what is believed at first.
"Writing this book, I imagine, has to be reunited with authors from the library shelves and far higher. What surprised them now?
"I was surprised Thomas, a writer of exemplary clarity, San Anselmo and so didactic presentation of its evidence for the existence of God, Leibniz and Monadology that verifies what Deleuze says about the creation of concepts and mad Borges expression of metaphysics as a branch of fantastic literature, and was surprised to get bored with Montaigne's Essays, a philosopher much more than I expected but I appreciate his revolutionary act send from the tower's meditations on his disappointment.
- Which of these books in your library choose for your bedside table?
"For now I am moved by the book I just wrote, that keep me company for now on my bedside table, will move to rest on a shelf in the library at the time that is available to future readers .
your feedback here ago
By: Gustavo Varela, "N", May 22, 2010
To a philosopher write a history of philosophy is more of an emotional event that an academic decision. Faced with the task of addressing 2500 years of history of thought is not only work but also perseverance and a sense of dedication and personal gratitude to this story. In one piece of old memories meet, current interests, read books again after many years, youth and maturity selective beliefs. It is the story of the laboratory where the philosopher built his own office, an emotional and intellectual geography exposes their innermost tracks.
Therefore, this history of philosophy who has just released Thomas Abraham is entitled "History of a Library" (South America), a chronological journey that begins with Plato and ends with Nietzsche. "The difference is that I write based on my experience and from reading my books," "says in this interview with Ñ. "The presentation of systems of thought of the philosophers stands theoretical composition, which lines of force permeate the text, the way they were received by me, the circumstances of his reading, and its impact on my thinking . But undoubtedly the main job is to convey, as accurately as possible, the novelty of a philosophy in his time and place. "
Abraham writes this story with the sweat of a blacksmith and the emotional power of a rock musician. It is, then, scholarship and strength, theoretical and creative display obsession. Thus his reading of the history of philosophy that does not suffer from osteoporosis, which orders the philosophers under a rigid and hollow concept.
Thomas Abraham writes short texts, accurate, sometimes mixing the philosopher's life and work, looking for problems rather than principles, all under direct language and with no assumptions or winks.
- What was the reason that led him to write a history of philosophy?
-had long wanted to write a book of philosophy in the strict sense. Recent years had published two books on literature, postcards and Friction Situations, and books that compile my articles and current affairs in Argentina and political philosophy. I started to write short essays on the Web philosophy. In the "Seminar on Thursday," my reference group of philosophical inquiry, had worked for two years the work of Gilles Deleuze, which resulted in the book The machine Deleuze and a comprehensive course on issues of philosophy. I posted on my website and my blog work on Kant, Rousseau and Kierkegaard. One day I said I wanted to write more and I saw I could take the time needed for the writing of a bit of philosophy I know from my memories of reading in the company of the great masters.
-references are continuously private lives of the philosophers. How do you understand the relationship between an author's life and work?
"Actually there is not always because they are not always significant. I do not separate life and work and neither do between text and history. Such divisions impoverished thought. The image of the rhizome is what it is. Draw connections. The interest of these depends on how they perform. It is interesting learn about aspects of the life of Hegel, for example, its efforts to earn a living, humiliation she suffered in the town houses where he worked as a tutor and was treated for "servant", which is the definite place in your Phenomenology mistranslated the word for "slave." With other philosophers biographies traverse the text, as in the case of Augustine and Rousseau. The misanthropy of Schopenhauer, Spinoza marginal life, the political work of Ockham or importantes.Considero Machiavelli are also the best introductions to philosophy are not the classic textbooks but the biographies written by authors with knowledge of philosophy and narrative talent. Is gender most powerful literary teaching today. Combines conceptual precision with the story of a story, ie what is usually called imagination.
-You say that "part of the pregnancy of philosophy in our culture is that we have inherited platitudes." What are they?
"There are different kinds of platitudes. Part of our vocabulary is Greek, from the word architecture to the word democracy. But there is also a commonplace abuse of philosophy from those who might want to give some luster. I remember when Senator Eduardo Menem during the eighties, in a speech in Congress to reject the draft Terragno to create a joint venture with SAS, Aerolineas Argentinas and the Swedish-flag defended the company with those extracted from the texts of Hegel. To not insist Mariano Grondona whose portrait is one of my books. Just as the President of the nation at the Congress of Philosophy at San Juan, saying that for Hegel it was very important. O Peron, in his inaugural speech of the famous congress of philosophy of 48, which stated that existentialism was a asquismo. The best was Menem who at least knew to laugh at himself and confessed that he had read Socrates. Then there are the men of culture who speak of the thing itself like a ball and despise the philosophers from a pose machoide that aims to show what's behind each of them. Talk about it in a chapter called "Sodomy and philosophy."
-After traveling over two thousand years of thinking, is there anything unique original in the eyes of a philosopher?
"No philosopher who has marked the history of Western thought that is not original. Being original is not born from an egg. Philosophers are as mammals and children as anyone of his time. But if they had not thought counter to the authorities of his time, nobody would have drawn attention, either in its present or posthumously, nothing would left of their works. Philosophers are not ideologues. They are creators of systems of thought. The political effects of his writings are distributed on both sides of a trench called social class divide. To say that Descartes laid the foundations of capitalism or the depredation of natural life, is a remnant of the way they taught philosophy behind the iron curtain moved to our country by the ideologues of our Iron Guard in the departments of philosophy and national socialism. Just learn about the persecution suffered by the sect of the "Cartesian" in Europe to measure the effects of thought subversive of its members to the power of the time. Not to mention the course content "bourgeois" Kant, perhaps the philosopher who paved the way for contemporary philosophy from Kierkegaard, to Marx and Nietzsche, and atheism existential thought and modern skepticism. To not insist on slavery behind the dialogues of Plato and Aristotle's treatises or Heidegger's Nazism, and Stalinism of Sartre. Heidegger's Nazism or invalidate the special course on Nietzsche issued during the Third Reich or the text on the ghost of Stalin makes a dent in an admirable work Being and Nothingness. On one side is mistakenly believe that the philosophies are worldviews that determine political developments, it is not true. Determined unless the increases in the price of potatoes and taxes on imports of tea, as in French and American revolutions. On the other hand, is to ignore, on behalf of a pan-ideological, the task of thinking of the great philosophers subverts cultural norms.
- How much influence the different interpretations of a thinker at the time of writing about his work?
"It's very strange and varied our relationship with philosophers and philosophy texts. You can refer to a philosopher having read only, or in chunks. It happened with Kant. Educated in environments that divided philosophical philosophy among those who were with the slogan Kantian peace and administration and those who were adept at the ardor of the flame Nietzsche, took sides with the latter until I did was read Kant not long ago and discovered a genius. What I do not depart from Nietzsche, but he added another thought with which rub and strengthens our understanding of the twilight of the idols of our time. Read a few pages of The Critique of Practical Reason and The Genealogy of Morals, every morning, gives us energy for the day. Usually philosophers know indirectly. For other philosophers, for readers of their works, performers, or the chances of life. Story on the front pages of my book how I read my first book of philosophy at fifteen, History of Philosophy by Will Durant, and I was fascinated by the engraving of Gustave Doré (maybe it was a cut in the famous painting by David ) of Socrates in his cell by lifting the cup of hemlock to the prayer of his young disciples, and the words that accompanied it said: "The death of a martyr of thought." I was shocked. He knew what he was a martyr, religions were full of them, but did not know you could die and sacrifice for something called "thinking." An English teacher recommended me the first dialogue Plato, and then found out what had killed Socrates. Had left the cave, and it is paid. Story then I did the same, I left my cave, especially since my cave mouth was a stutterer, and I got to talk despite my oral dysfunction. Had to talk to outside, and not to swallow every word, and do it in the imperative tone and challenging teacher Socrates. That decided my vocation and helped me in my healing.
- How do you choose what deserves to be told of each author?
-How do I choose what I'm interested in any text. It is a matter of look. What deserves to be read is not always what the author considers it meritorious. There are teachers of reading, and I have appointed. I can add others as Witold Gombrowicz who taught me to study and pay attention to the system poses the representatives of high culture. This is what developed in the essay on Aira and Piglia in friction. There must be something that catches my attention and then I plug in my brain cells and let it do its work incoming according to the synapses and circuits that do not control completely. It is thought as you type. Anyway there are all very hard preparatory work that takes years of study, research, reading cards and marginal notes. The thought is woven by little. And so what deserves to be read and written is not always what is believed at first.
"Writing this book, I imagine, has to be reunited with authors from the library shelves and far higher. What surprised them now?
"I was surprised Thomas, a writer of exemplary clarity, San Anselmo and so didactic presentation of its evidence for the existence of God, Leibniz and Monadology that verifies what Deleuze says about the creation of concepts and mad Borges expression of metaphysics as a branch of fantastic literature, and was surprised to get bored with Montaigne's Essays, a philosopher much more than I expected but I appreciate his revolutionary act send from the tower's meditations on his disappointment.
- Which of these books in your library choose for your bedside table?
"For now I am moved by the book I just wrote, that keep me company for now on my bedside table, will move to rest on a shelf in the library at the time that is available to future readers .
your feedback here ago
0 comments:
Post a Comment