A contrapelo da agenda pós: ciência, cultura e educação em Nietzsche
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
This thesis problematizes the appropriation of Nietzschean philosophy by a particular sector of Brazilian scientific research in Education, whose theoretical framework is associated with what Ellen Wood (1996) names the Postmodern agenda. By taking into account the current scenario of neoliberal globalization of capitalism, the following research question is posed: to what extent can Nietzsche's criticism of the economicist instrumentalization imposed by industrial expansion on German culture and the educational system in his time – as elaborated in On the future of our teaching institutions (NIETZSCHE, 1979, 2014) – contribute, nowadays, to theoretical reflection on an emancipatory educational project that is rid of both market impositions and the affirmation of subjective characters such as intellectual independence and creative freedom? The central objective of the study is to show that by countering the critical (anti-dogmatic and anti-capitalist) with relativist perspectives, it is possible to reposition Nietzsche's philosophy within the scope of Brazilian scientific research in the field of Education. We thus argue Nietzsche's philosophy is situated within the critical tradition - namely, a theoretical domain committed to anti-dogmatism and anti-capitalism, respectively guided by the denial of reality taken for granted and by the envisioning of its overcoming. The literature review shows that as far as this critical perspective is concerned, Nietzsche's contribution to critical conceptions of the philosophy of Education has fallen into oblivion in the critical field of the philosophy of education, especially with regard to his theorizing on overcoming the capitalist system. Concomitantly, there is, to a large extent, an alignment of research in Education with the relativist reception of Nietzschean thought. The central hypothesis of the thesis is that in his first productive phase, Nietzsche develops a critical (HEIT; PICHLER, 2015; HEIT, 2018), non-relativist (MARTON, 2011a; AZEREDO, 2012; MARTON 2020), perspectivist phylosophy (CORBANEZI, 2013; MATTOS, 2013; DALLA VECCHIA, 2014), which is connected to a particular type of naturalism – liberal, non-scientificist, experimental, perspectivist (SCHACHT, 2011; LOPES, 2011a; HEIT, 2015; CARVALHO, 2018; ITAPARICA, 2018). Nietzsche's anti-dogmatism thematized in this thesis is based on our questioning of the legitimacy of what a significant part of scholarly work advocates: programmatically, the philosopher is thought to have cultivated an alleged enmity towards the sciences. We take issue with this view by underscoring the intense, long-lasting and historically necessary imbrication between Nietzschean thought and the scientific field. Based on translations of Nietzsche´s works into Portuguese (1979,1992a, 1992b, 1995, 1998, 2000a, 2000b, 2001a, 2001b, 2003, 2004, 2007, 2008, 2011, 2014, 2017, 2020a, 2020b) and on stances taken by a number of commentators, we conclude that Nietzsche positioned himself both as an enthusiast of the scientific method and a critic of the dogmatism the sciences inherited from metaphysical tradition; of thematic specialization as well as of the pragmatic instrumentalization of scientific production. As for the cultural and educational transformation that was going on in Germany in the second half of the 19th century, it will be shown that Nietzsche's On the future of our teaching institutions (NIETZSCHE, 2014) offers consistent answers to the research question that guides the study. The contribution of Nietzschean thought as a basis for current critical research in education (anti-dogmatic and anti-capitalist) is also confirmed in the dialogue between the nineteenth-century philosopher's analyses and those elaborated by contemporary sociologist Christian Laval (2019) in Schools are not companies: neoliberal attack on public education, a book in which Nietzsche's view regarding education constrained by the impositions of efficacy is thought of as premonitory.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,005 | 0,007 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,005 | 0,021 |
| Communication savante | 0,009 | 0,009 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,004 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,003 | 0,005 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,004 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».