Evoluzionismo e storicismo nelle scienze sociali: l’intenzionalità dell’azione umana contro il postulato di razionalità

This entry is part 19 of 26 in the series Vol 6-2021

Abstract: this essay aims to describe the difference between intentional action and rational action, in order to criticize the Misesian postulate of economic rationality identifiable with the metaphor of homo oeconomicus. In his intellectual production, Karl Popper exposed the conjectures and confutations theory to build a solid scientific approach to the study of human actions, resorting to the Darwinian evolutionary theory, underlining its limits and its possible compensation with the Lamarckian one. He reached the conclusion that the rationality of human conduct is never total, approaching (unconsciously) much more the Weberian canons than those of the Austrian school of economics.

View full Article in PDF

Der Anspruch der Gefühle in der Phänomenologie: Heidegger und Sartre en face der Epoché.

This entry is part 6 of 31 in the series Vol 1-2016

Abstract: The paper proposes an unusual approach to Heidegger and Sartre, showing a resonance in the way both thinkers radically reinterpret one of the most important requirements for the phenomenological method: the Epoché (phenomenological reduction). The comparison I suggest between Heidegger’s and Sartre’s critique, or raising of the Epoché is particularly interesting, considering the historical and political opposition between the two philosophers. And thus despite, or maybe even because of the fact that the relation between thought and action is not alien but fundamental to the question about the primary meaning of the existence in the phenomenological inquiry – which is the question of the Epoché. The radicalization of the Epoché concerns narrowly the meaning of the subject’s existence in its historicity and facticity, which Husserl, in both Heidegger’s and Sartre’s views, seems to have not considered deeply enough in order to grasp the pure field of subjectivity. On this common path of disagreement with Husserl, Heidegger and Sartre develop different ways to come to term with it.  To both, Husserl´s theoretical premise of the reduction seems to be the last repetition of the metaphysical prejudice against the importance of affects for the philosophical thinking. Heidegger does not refuse a sort of specific attitude as premise of the phenomenological method, he argues, however, that it must implicate and not suspend the facticity of the subject. With his conception of an event character of the Stimmung, which Heidegger elaborates after the publication of Sein und Zeit until the Beiträge and Besinnung, he radically reinterprets Husserl´s phenomenological reduction, without removing its temporal existential implication. Sartre too sees in the affect one and maybe the only possible trasformation of the Epoché. This happens already in his first philosophical essay, La transcendance de l´ego. But, Heidegger rethinks the reduction through the semantic field of Stimmung (mood), tracing the polysemy of the verb stimmen as root of Stimmung and of Stimme (voice). Sartre, on the contrary, considers the régard (gaze) as a fulfilled reduction, which delimitates the horizont of the phenomenality.

View full Article in PDF