Publication: Razón y utopía. Hacia una radicalización de los posibles
Loading...
Official URL
Full text at PDC
Publication Date
2019-10-25
Authors
Advisors (or tutors)
Editors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Citations
Exportar
Abstract
Las sociedades del mundo más desarrollado llevan tiempo enfrentadas con una contradicción radical: si las banderas de la libertad y de la igualdad, del progreso y de la pacificación social son, no solo acompañantes de viaje, sino más aún ejecutoras directas de las sociedades modernas, ¿cómo podemos explicar que el siglo XX se haya constituido como el más mortífero de cuantos logra recordar la historia del ser humano?
Algunas voces se alzaron tras los desastres de la Primera y la Segunda Guerra Mundial para anunciar que aquello había sido solo un paréntesis, una suerte de meta-realidad que, justamente por renunciar a los principios de la razón y el progreso, había podido tener lugar en esos términos de barbarie. Otras voces se negaron, en cambio, a aceptar esta indulgencia hacia la forma de vida moderna y destacaron que Auschwitz no constituía un hiato dentro de la historia, sino, antes, al contrario, el punto álgido de su formación racional. En este sentido, ¿es la razón auténticamente opositora del mito o, por el contrario, integra ella misma todo un itinerario mitológico?, ¿qué tipo de razón es esa que se presenta como enteramente neutral y pacífica? Este punto ha sido tomado como casilla de salida para algunos pensadores contemporáneos. Es propósito de esta investigación seguir esa estela y alumbrar posibles hipótesis de trabajo que permitan seguir pensando las realidades que habitamos o, más precisamente, las realidades que nos habitan.
The societies of the developed world have long faced a radical contradiction: if the banners of freedom and equality, progress and social pacification are not only traveling companions, but even more direct executors of modern societies, how can we explain that the twentieth century has become the deadliest of all those who manage to remember the history of the human being? Some voices were raised after the disasters of the First and Second World Wars to announce that this had only been a parenthesis, a kind of meta-reality that, precisely by renouncing the principles of reason and progress, had been able to take place in those terms of barbarism. On the other hand, other voices refused to accept this indulgence towards the modern way of life and emphasized that Auschwitz did not constitute a hiatus in history, but rather the high point of its rational formation. In this sense, is the reason authentically opposed to the myth or, on the contrary, does it itself integrate a whole mythological itinerary? What kind of reason is it, that is presented as entirely neutral and peaceful? This point has been taken as a starting point for some contemporary thinkers. It is the purpose of this research to follow that trail and illuminate possible working hypotheses that allow us to continue thinking about the realities that we inhabit or, more precisely, the realities that inhabit us.
The societies of the developed world have long faced a radical contradiction: if the banners of freedom and equality, progress and social pacification are not only traveling companions, but even more direct executors of modern societies, how can we explain that the twentieth century has become the deadliest of all those who manage to remember the history of the human being? Some voices were raised after the disasters of the First and Second World Wars to announce that this had only been a parenthesis, a kind of meta-reality that, precisely by renouncing the principles of reason and progress, had been able to take place in those terms of barbarism. On the other hand, other voices refused to accept this indulgence towards the modern way of life and emphasized that Auschwitz did not constitute a hiatus in history, but rather the high point of its rational formation. In this sense, is the reason authentically opposed to the myth or, on the contrary, does it itself integrate a whole mythological itinerary? What kind of reason is it, that is presented as entirely neutral and peaceful? This point has been taken as a starting point for some contemporary thinkers. It is the purpose of this research to follow that trail and illuminate possible working hypotheses that allow us to continue thinking about the realities that we inhabit or, more precisely, the realities that inhabit us.