O destino dos traços visíveis do passado: o problema da produção de conhecimento no diálogo crítico de Pierre Vilar com Louis Althusser

• Ano de defesa: 2019
• Autor(a) principal: Souza, Geise Targa De [UNIFESP]
• Tipo de documento: Dissertação
• Tipo de acesso: Acesso aberto
• Idioma: por
• Instituição de defesa: Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP)
• Palavras-chave em Português: History Of Historiography; Theory Of History; Historical Materialism.; História Da Historiografia; Teoria Da História; Materialismo Histórico
• Link de acesso: https://sucupira.capes.gov.br/sucupira/public/consultas/coleta/trabalhoConclusao/viewTrabalhoConclusao.jsf?popup=true&id_trabalho=8017180; https://repositorio.unifesp.br/handle/11600/59818

The present study seeks to (re)construct the critical dialogue of Pierre Vilar with Louis Althusser, between the years 1964 and 1973 in France. Both were intellectuals who gained international projection in the 1960s and defined themselves as Marxists, however, Vilar was a historian and Althusser a philosopher. The places of production of these two intellectuals impacted on the way they understood Marxism, as well as a "dispute" on the concept of raw material, where there was no common accord. The definition of this concept produced impacts on the conception of knowledge production for each one of the authors, marking two singular forms of appropriation of Marxism and two distinct defenses on how it was possible to produce knowledge. We present this dialogue of a theoretical nature, while recognizing that it is the product of a situation profoundly influenced by the 20th Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union in 1956 and by May 1968 in France. Our research intends to be a contribution to the area of History of Historiography, as a study of the history of theoretically oriented history writing, with this, we establish that our objective refers to the discussion of concepts and theoretical or methodological formulations that were put by the two authors. In highlighting his position on this subject, of fundamental importance still today, we have recovered not only a very important period in the history of historiography, but also recognize the position of these two authors in the face of the problem of knowledge production and consequently of the definition of the raw material of this process.