Suchergebnisse

The democratic leadership literature emphasises those leadership practices that involve dialogue and communication within the frame of reference of existing organizational structures, discourses and hierarchies. Our contribution is to problematise this approach to democracy from the perspective of the work of Jacques Rancière, which highlights the importance of dissensus, that is to say a breaking away from organizational structures and hierarchies. We argue that this allows us to conceptualise collective leadership in a postfoundational way that connects a critique of individual and organization-bound leadership to a democratic logic, in particular through Rancière's analysis of the myth of the murder of the shepherd. This also enables us to study radically disruptive, non-hierarchical and pre-dialogic dimensions of leadership that may destruct as well as construct. Two democratic leadership practices are outlined: contingent acts of leadership and the practice of radical contestation. Our argument is that both practices of democratic leadership can be deployed as radical ruptures and disruptions of organizational orders, beyond dialogue.

The democratic leadership literature emphasises those leadership practices that involve dialogue and communication within the frame of reference of existing organizational structures, discourses and hierarchies. Our contribution is to problematise this approach to democracy from the perspective of the work of Jacques Rancière, which highlights the importance of dissensus, that is to say a breaking away from organizational structures and hierarchies. We argue that this allows us to conceptualise collective leadership in a postfoundational way that connects a critique of individual and organization-bound leadership to a democratic logic, in particular through Rancière's analysis of the myth of the murder of the shepherd. This also enables us to study radically disruptive, non-hierarchical and pre-dialogic dimensions of leadership that may destruct as well as construct. Two democratic leadership practices are outlined: contingent acts of leadership and the practice of radical contestation. Our argument is that both practices of democratic leadership can be deployed as radical ruptures and disruptions of organizational orders, beyond dialogue.

Esta comunicación contrapone las lecturas de Platón provistas por Jacques Rancière y Leo Strauss. Con esto, se da a ver que la reposición que Rancière hace de la filosofía política pierde de vista una serie de contribuciones centrales a efectos de la reflexión sobre el problema político. Sostenemos específicamente que la arquipolítica platónica, tal como Rancière la reconstruye, ofrece una lectura descompensada de la obra de Platón, que pierde de vista sus componentes más inquietantes y productivos a efectos de una reflexión sobre la relación entre filosofía y política. Esta descompensación es fruto de una inadecuada comprensión del idealismo platónico, esto es, una comprensión superficial de la obra de Platón que pierde de vista la intención y sentido políticos de la postulación filosófica de la ciudad ideal. ; This article contrasts the interpretations of Plato provided by Jacques Rancière and Leo Strauss. This contrastation makes evident that Rancière's reconstruction of political philosophy fails to account for a series of central contributions concerning the problem of politics. Specifically, this article argues that Platonic archipolitics, as reconstructed by Rancière, offers an unbalanced reading of Plato's work, which neglects most provocative and productive elements when it comes to account for the relation between philosophy and politics. It is argued that this lack of balance must be traced to the fact that Rancière's reading of Plato provides an inadequate comprehension of Plato's idealism, i.e., a superficial reading that fails to account for the political meaning and intention of the philosophical statement of the ideal city. ; Fil: Nosetto, Luciano Ezequiel. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Ciencias Sociales. Instituto de Investigaciones ; Argentina

Esta comunicación contrapone las lecturas de Platón provistas por Jacques Rancière y Leo Strauss. Con esto, se da a ver que la reposición que Rancière hace de la filosofía política pierde de vista una serie de contribuciones centrales a efectos de la reflexión sobre el problema político. Sostenemos específicamente que la arquipolítica platónica, tal como Rancière la reconstruye, ofrece una lectura descompensada de la obra de Platón, que pierde de vista sus componentes más inquietantes y productivos a efectos de una reflexión sobre el problema político. Esto, debido a que la lectura que Rancière hace de Platón está determinada por su polémica con el republicanismo francés y sobredeterminada por su polémica con el marxismo ; This article contrasts the interpretations of Plato provided by Jacques Rancière and Leo Strauss. This contrastation makes evident that Rancière's reconstruction of political philosophy fails to account for a series of central contributions concerning the problem of politics. Specifically, this article argues that Platonic archipolitics, as reconstructed by Rancière, offers an unbalanced reading of Plato's work, which neglects most provocative and productive elements when it comes to account for the relation between philosophy and politics. It is argued that this lack of balance must be traced to the fact that Rancière's reading of Plato provides an inadequate comprehension of Plato's idealism, i.e., a superficial reading that fails to account for the political meaning and intention of the philosophical statement of the ideal city. ; Esta comunicación contrapone las lecturas de Platón provistas por Jacques Rancière y Leo Strauss. Con esto, se da a ver que la reposición que Rancière hace de la filosofía política pierde de vista una serie de contribuciones centrales a efectos de la reflexión sobre el problema político. Sostenemos específicamente que la arquipolítica platónica, tal como Rancière la reconstruye, ofrece una lectura descompensada de la obra de Platón, que pierde de vista sus componentes más inquietantes y productivos a efectos de una reflexión sobre la relación entre filosofía y política. Esta descompensación es fruto de una inadecuada comprensión del idealismo platónico, esto es, una comprensión superficial de la obra de Platón que pierde de vista la intención y sentido políticos de la postulación filosófica de la ciudad ideal

Tomás Eloy Martínez publicó Santa Evita en 1996. En esta novela, en la que convergen elementos de literatura e investigación periodística, se entretejen distintas historias que tienen como protagonista a la misma figura: Eva Duarte de Perón. En total se pueden identificar cuatro líneas de sucesos que luego se unifican en la trama central. La principal, y a partir de la cual se construyen las tres restantes, es el secuestro del cadáver embalsamado de Evita por parte de los militares argentinos. La segunda tiene que ver con la lucha que le presentó la esposa de Perón al cáncer. La tercera narra las distintas funciones que cumplió durante el gobierno peronista y cómo sobrellevó las presiones políticas de ser la "abanderada de los pobres". La cuarta describe la transformación que se produjo en ella desde que partió de su pueblo natal y empezó a trabajar en los primeros radioteatros hasta que conoció a Perón. En cada una de estas líneas se construye una figura distinta de Evita que convergen en la edificación definitiva: Santa Evita. El propósito de este trabajo es analizar la construcción de cada una de ellas a partir de dos perspectivas opuestas: Jean Paul Sartre y Jacques Rancière. Sartre consideraba que la prosa es utilitaria. Según él, el escritor revela el mundo para que nadie sea indiferente a lo que acontece. La literatura es un medio para el compromiso político. Sin embargo, para Rancière, no existe un fin político por fuera de ella. La literatura hace política en tanto literatura. Esto se debe a que, en su interior, lleva adelante una reconfiguración sensitiva de aquello que representa. ; Eje 13. Análisis del discurso y estudios del lenguaje ; Facultad de Periodismo y Comunicación Social

There is a transhistoric dimension in Rancière's oeuvre that claims a capacity of the people to use speech and words for their emancipatory and thus political purposes. People are able to make history because they are "literate" beings. But history as history and as historiography alike is also a key element in his thought of the literate and political being in so far as it has a historic dimension, has itself a history. The turning point in the history of his- toriography is the revolution of literature, which changes completely the relationship between acting and telling stories, between what is worthy to narrate and what is a story. In the 18th century the revolution of literature is a condition for scientific historiography. Rancière's own historiography of 19th century workers tries to put forward another kind of historiography that does not reduce the event and the new to its historical conditions, refusing the expression-model of modern historiography. ; There is a transhistoric dimension in Rancière's oeuvre that claims a capacity of the people to use speech and words for their emancipatory and thus political purposes. People are able to make history because they are "literate" beings. But history as history and as historiography alike is also a key element in his thought of the literate and political being in so far as it has a historic dimension, has itself a history. The turning point in the history of his- toriography is the revolution of literature, which changes completely the relationship between acting and telling stories, between what is worthy to narrate and what is a story. In the 18th century the revolution of literature is a condition for scientific historiography. Rancière's own historiography of 19th century workers tries to put forward another kind of historiography that does not reduce the event and the new to its historical conditions, refusing the expression-model of modern historiography.

In der gegenwärtigen bildungspolitischen wie wissenschaftlichen Argumentation zur Frage von Inklusion/Exklusion ist eine zirkuläre Begründungslogik aus den Segmenten Demokratie - soziale Inklusion - Bildung zu beobachten. Der Beitrag untersucht die Wechselwirkungen der Segmente und im Besonderen die ambivalente Position der Erwachsenenbildung in diesem Spannungsfeld. Davon ausgehend sind anhand der Thesen eines französischen Vertreters der politischen Philosophie, Jacques Rancière, die zugrunde liegenden Prämissen der zirkulären Logik infrage zu stellen. Dies eröffnet eine veränderte Perspektive auf die Aufgabe von Erwachsenenbildung im Kontext von Inklusion/Exklusion, und zwar als Praxis des Streits über die Gestaltung des öffentlichen Raumes.

A reflexão estética contemporânea encontra no pensamento de Jacques Rancière um debate profícuo e consequente, em que são repensados alguns de seus vínculos fundamentais. Destaca-se sua tese de mútua constituição entre o estético e o político, sintetizada em sua noção de 'partilha do sensível'. ; The contemporary aesthetic thinking finds in the philosophical propositions of Jacques Rancière a consequent and proficuous debate, in which are reconsidered some of its fundamental links. This text emphasizes his thesis of mutual relationship between the aesthetics and politics, synthesized in his notion of 'the partition of the sensible' ; La reflexión estética contemporánea encuentra en el pensamiento de Jacques Rancière un debate profícuo y consecuente, en que son repensados algunos de sus vínculos fundamentales. Se destaca su tesis de mutua constitución entre el estético y el político, sintetizada en su noción de 'reparto del sensible'.

Cet article porte sur la réflexion de Jacques Rancière à propos des formes nouvelles de la littérature moderne et leur politique. Il se propose de présenterla façon dont l'analyse des modes de construction de sens propres à cette fictiony révèle une politique toute différente de celle soutenue par les interprétationsdominantes qui se développent au cours du XXe siècleet rejoint la conception d'émancipation de l'auteur.

This paper explores the main tasks of critical research, which according to a negative dialectial reading of Rancière/Foucault link, targets the actuality of Kant's question and the question of philosophy. What is Critique? Why Philosophy? What is Thinking today? This in order to deploy the central conflicts and affinities between the two philosophers, articulated within this rigorous and unruly reflective experience that we call philosophy and it s privileged field in the case of both theoretical and conceptual universes, namely: the object of politics. ; El presente trabajo explora las tareas de la investigación crítica, que de acuerdo con una lectura dialéctica negativa de la relación Rancière/Foucault, expresa la actualidad de la pregunta kantiana y la cuestión de la filosofía. ¿Qué es la crítica? ¿Para qué la filosofía? ¿Qué es pensar hoy? Ambas cuestiones sirven para desplegar lo núcleos tensores y afinidades que ambos filósofos articulan en torno a esa rigurosa e indócil experiencia reflexiva que denominamos filosofía y su campo privilegiado en el caso de los aparatos teórico-conceptuales de ambos, a saber: el objeto de lo político.

In focusing on Jacques Rancière and Walter Benjamin, the main concern of this essay is to outline an alternative concept of the historical sub­ject. As I assume, subjectivity primarily forms itself in being oriented to that which is incommensurable, namely, the radical positivity of being itself. First, I show that Rancière's concept of 'equality' can be read in terms of this basic formative movement. Equality enables political claims and, accordingly, poli­tical subjecti cation while, ultimately, remaining irredeemable. Yet, I do not agree with the aporetic character of equality in Rancière, which, in my view, creates a perpetuation of injustice. In order to overcome it, I draw on Benjamin and demonstrate that, in implicitly referring to redemption, the irredeemable has a positive content. In a relative way, it can be restored when­ ever the remembrance of past suffering is incorporated into new claims of justice. Historical subjects originate in this merging of present and past. ; In focusing on Jacques Rancière and Walter Benjamin, the main concern of this essay is to outline an alternative concept of the historical sub­ject. As I assume, subjectivity primarily forms itself in being oriented to that which is incommensurable, namely, the radical positivity of being itself. First, I show that Rancière's concept of 'equality' can be read in terms of this basic formative movement. Equality enables political claims and, accordingly, poli­tical subjecti cation while, ultimately, remaining irredeemable. Yet, I do not agree with the aporetic character of equality in Rancière, which, in my view, creates a perpetuation of injustice. In order to overcome it, I draw on Benjamin and demonstrate that, in implicitly referring to redemption, the irredeemable has a positive content. In a relative way, it can be restored when­ ever the remembrance of past suffering is incorporated into new claims of justice. Historical subjects originate in this merging of present and past.