Elegia e relatografia: Paul Veyne e seus devires filosóficos

• Autor(a) principal: Silva, Gustavo Ruiz da
• Data de Publicação: 2023
• Tipo de documento: Dissertação
• Idioma: por
• Título da fonte: Biblioteca Digital de Teses e Dissertações da PUC_SP
• Texto Completo: https://repositorio.pucsp.br/jspui/handle/handle/39523
• topic: CNPQ::CIENCIAS HUMANAS::FILOSOFIA; Paul Veyne; Relatografia romanceada; Heterônimos; Elegia; Beleza filosófica; Paul Veyne; Novelled storiography; Heteronyms; Elegy; Philosophical beauty

Elegy and Storiography: Paul Veyne and his philosophical becomings sustains that there is a heteronomous expression of the authors referenced by Veyne that permeates his works and investigations. This research works on three questions that depart from this bet. The first chapter, starting from Nietzsche, aims to present the Veynian literary-history notion, a novelized relatography, that supports the rest of this research. Still, the notion of history as a novel, as presented in Comment on écrit l'histoire: essai d'epistemologie (1971), will be studied in more depth to clarify the notion of character (here reconstructed as heteronym). The second chapter will present the notion of elegiac text – present in L'élégie érotique romaine: l'amour, la poésie et l'Occident (1983) –, a literary reference that will guide Veyne's operations on the creation of heteronyms. In the last chapter, the choice of these heteronyms will be structured within the work of this historian-philosopher, especially distinguishing those thinkers called “with aura” (operator of the so-called “philosophical beauty”) and who act as references. The books analyzed are: Les Grecs ont-ils cru à leurs mythes? Essai sur l'imagination constituante (1983) and Foucault, sa pensée, sa personne (2008). Finally, there will be an Afterword with some notes on the historiographical process operated in modern western philosophy. Operating in the formation of foundations through the previous reading of the structural principle of the texts, it aims to reestablish the author's argumentative peculiarity. In this way, the undertaking of this research seeks not only a better understanding of a canonical author of History but also the philosophical fortification of a thinker until now marginal to the “Official History of Philosophy”