A vaidade da razão na Apologia de Raymond Sebond de Montaigne
Ano de defesa: | 2019 |
---|---|
Autor(a) principal: | |
Orientador(a): | |
Banca de defesa: | , , , |
Tipo de documento: | Dissertação |
Tipo de acesso: | Acesso aberto |
Idioma: | por |
Instituição de defesa: |
Universidade Estadual do Oeste do Paraná
Toledo |
Programa de Pós-Graduação: |
Programa de Pós-Graduação em Filosofia
|
Departamento: |
Centro de Ciências Humanas e Sociais
|
País: |
Brasil
|
Palavras-chave em Português: | |
Palavras-chave em Inglês: | |
Área do conhecimento CNPq: | |
Link de acesso: | http://tede.unioeste.br/handle/tede/4576 |
Resumo: | This dissertation intends to investigate the essay of Michel de Montaigne called “Apology to Raymond Sebond”. In this essay, we will specifically address the notion of vanity exposed by the philosopher. We will understand what are the typical characteristics of the vanity exposed by the political-religious strands denominated Protestantism and Catholicism. In this sense, from an apology to the Catalan theologian called Raymond Sebond, we will understand the various criticisms that such representatives of human misery (Catholicism) and human dignity (Protestantism) make to the theologian in the face of his natural theology, from then onwards typically skeptical of the philosopher, establish the limits that our reason provides, thus evidencing the vanity exposed in such arguments. Finally, we will understand why Montaigne establish a greater critique to the Protestants than Catholics, evidencing a greater vanity in rational arguments than proper Catholic anti-rationalist faith. In order to understand these factors, we will study the various arguments that defend the privileged position of reason both within rationalist and empirical theories, of which the senses are the only ones that can conceive of truth. In the unfolding of the work we will understand Montaigne's critique of morals, putting in check the universalist tendency of the laws of certain cultures. Thus, we follow Montaigne's critical path in order to establish a critique of the dogmatic nature of such statements, thus understanding the vanity exposed in these arguments. |