Esta é sua vida, Charlie Brown.
It seems that in The structure of behavior, Merleau-Ponty started investigating lower forms of live and its comportment, the complex notion of βίος is taken on the phenomenology of perception. It is interesting to point that this distinction between lower and higher forms of live that have different metaphysical relevance is taken in consideration already in Aristotle, as he distinguishes in his metaphysics between forms of bare live (ζῷον) and complex live forms (βίος), the hability of thinking (λέγω) is connected to the complex live forms, as well as the dimension of chronology. Now, Aristotle is quick to point that man is zoon echon logon (the animal which reproduces reason in language , or the animal that has speech) and ζῷον πολιτικόν (the political animal, or the animal inserted in the city [as opposed to the field, where the bare forms survive]), we could realize that Aristotle uses the word ζῷον to characterize man, at this point. Giorgio Agamben and Otfried Hoffe have advanced here the argument that by stressing the animality of human live, Aristotle only wishes to stress that while we acquire a characteristic that is a disrupture with the bare forms of live, we remain biologically tied to a certain animality – so there is some kind of relevance to the ζῷον in the sphere of βίος; conversely, animals have no access to what is called λόγος. The first point is what Heidegger calls “Boredom”, the second “Captivity”. Merleau-Ponty seems to be taking this metaphysical concern away from this anthropological center, and placing it in the context of Husserl’s Krisis, as we see this assessment of live within the project of a rebuilding of sciences.
Isso. Isso é parte de um Resumo para uma aula. Eu não cheguei nesse nivel de barbaridade nem na minha dissertação. E agora isso é parte de um resumo. Para uma aula. Resumo. Aula.
E além de tudo, eu tenho que entender minha própria letra no caderno.