A experiência da indivisão na filosofia de Merleau-Ponty

• Autor(a) principal: Dias, César Gomes Bonfim
• Data de Publicação: 2011
• Tipo de documento: Dissertação
• Idioma: por
• Título da fonte: Biblioteca Digital de Teses e Dissertações da PUC_SP
• Texto Completo: https://tede2.pucsp.br/handle/handle/11593
• topic: Percepção; Corpo fenomenal; Expressão; Unidade; Entrecruzamento; Carne; Reversibilidade; Dimensionalidade; Indivisibilidade; Quiasma; Perception; Body phenomenal; Expression; Unity; Speaking subject; Crossroads; Flesh; Reversibility; Dimensionality; Indivisibility; Chiasm; CNPQ::CIENCIAS HUMANAS::FILOSOFIA

This work aims to understand how to configure the theme of indivision on the thought of Maurice Merleau-ponty (1908 - 1961). The term indivision appears in philosophical sense, between 1958 and 1960, taught courses at the Collège of France, such as joint ownership body and worldly, that is, from my body with me, of my body with the world and of the bodies among themselves. Merleau-Ponty asserts that we are indivisibility . As the term body refers to the perceptual experience body that the subject has of himself, of the things, of the world and of the other, this indivision and it, too, an experience, an experience of indivision, such as express our title. The indivision descends from the husserlian intentionality, it refers to the mode of being of consciousness as consciousness of something. Merleau-ponty combines this theme to the Lebenswelt (world of life) husserlian and establishes their reflections on the horizon of an intentionality operant, a way to be original that works from the inside, which allows for the existence of intercorporeality and interworld. This way of being original identifies himself to what we call from experience of indivision. It is this over the course of three reflections developed by the philosopher, namely the perceptual experience body, the expression and the reflection on the flesh. In the first, the body phenomenal provides at the philosopher thinking a kind of unity that exists for himself to himself (the subject as the body) and in communion with the world, with things and with the other - a way of indivision founded on corporeality. In the second reflection, thinking about the meaning of the expression, from the perspective of the experience of the speaking subject makes it possible to understand the operation of expression the operationality a point or moment of indivision. The spousal of the language by speaking subject indicates a layer of indivision woven of yarns diacritics and a crossroads between the elements that make up this layer. In the third reflection, the flesh shows the same nature of the experience of indivision as indivisibility. There are carnal indivisibility between the "I" and the "world" (I and things, between myself and the other). The flesh, as a element and dimensionality that make up the indivision, it is a way of being that is being carried out by the agency of its own operation, enabling the identity, the difference and as well as the links between all the fleshs