A instituição simbólica da criatividade: uma contribuição à teoria sociológica a partir de Mead e Castoriadis

• Autor(a) principal: Prates, Marcos Tavares
• Data de Publicação: 2015
• Tipo de documento: Dissertação
• Idioma: por
• Título da fonte: Biblioteca Digital de Teses e Dissertações da UERJ
• Texto Completo: http://www.bdtd.uerj.br/handle/1/15552
• topic: Creativity; Imaginary; Social behaviorism; Reflexivity; Autonomy; Criatividade; Imaginário; Behaviorismo social; Reflexividade; Autonomia; CNPQ::CIENCIAS HUMANAS::SOCIOLOGIA::FUNDAMENTOS DA SOCIOLOGIA::TEORIA SOCIOLOGICA

This master thesis aims to make a contribution to the debate on social creativity in sociological theory. By concerning some issues about the reflexive position of the subject in the imaginary realm, this work appears divided in two parts: first, there is an analysis of the most basic assumptions of George H. Mead's social behaviorism on action; next, a discussion from the perspective adopted by Cornelius Castoriadis in his critique of determinisms of nature, society, psyche, and philosophical and political thought. Both authors were chosen because they offer crucial insights for us to understand social causality break and determinacy in social sciences, and also the teleological aspect of action within historical processes. In Mead, we have creativity confined to interaction - through what he calls intelligent conduct , which is also unpredictable - due to the practical usage of language and reflexive dimensions of the self. In Castoriadis, creativity appears inserted in the radical imaginary domain, where the psyche and that would be the same as saying about the productions of the unconscious plays a key role to the understanding of the symbolic within social institutions and the possibilities of autonomy in democracy, both in collective and individual aspects. At the end of this double presentation, there will be a possibility to illustrate how these different approaches might help us in terms of research concerning social creativity and modern imaginary. In this sense, it is not relevant to consider creativity as a residual category but as one which manifests itself beyond individual action. Thus, action cannot be analysed the same way under traditional formats, but linked to others issues. In order to do that, this work offers others notions such as subjectivity, psychoanalytic issues, mechanisms, trends and the debate concerning the uniformity of nature.