"The range of what we think and do is limited by what we fail to notice. And because we fail to notice that we fail to notice there is little we can do to change until we notice how failing to notice shapes our thoughts and deeds." (Ronald D. Laing)
quarta-feira, janeiro 30, 2008
Francisco Anselmo de Barros
Putrefactos. Todos os homens que não sabem o que é morrer por uma causa.
"Já que não temos votos para salvar o Pantanal, vamos dar a vida para salvá-lo" Francisco Anselmo "Franselmo" de Barros
http://www.supersitegood.com/releitura/texto.php?mat=316 <- As últimas horas do ambientalista Francelmo Barros (20/11/2005 - André Petry)
http://www1.folha.uol.com.br/fsp/cotidian/ff1411200502.htm <- Ambientalista morre após atear fogo ao própio corpo [HUDSON CORRÊA DA AGÊNCIA FOLHA, EM SINOP (MT)]
VIDEO: http://youtu.be/KXbrSZRKykQ <- Ambientalista Francisco Anselmo de Barros, ele quem elegi para herói nestes tempos em que achar um espécime desta natureza é praticamente impossível. Era presidente da ONG Fundação para Conservação da Natureza de Mato Grosso do Sul, ateou fogo no próprio corpo durante manifestação contra a implantação de usina de álcool no Pantanal. Muitos podem achar isso um absurdo, outros podem perguntar o que adiantou? Agora eu faço essa pergunta a vocês. Até onde vocês iriam por um objetivo? Esse homem deu sua própria vida por um objetivo que ele lutou sempre, pode não ter adiantado [...]
VIDEO: https://youtu.be/AOk-5OEtWSU?list=PL3F6BC200B2930084&t=13m13s <- [Eng Subs] [recorded in Spring 2011] Philosophy and the Science of Human Nature w/ Tamar Gendler; Lecture 13: Deontology; Chapter 2. Immanuel Kant and Deontology TRANSCRIPT: "[...] So, says Kant, a witty, persevering, rich, healthy, moderate thief will be an outstanding thief--but that doesn't make his thiefdom good. Each of the virtues that has traditionally been extolled as a virtue, says Kant, gains its value only in so far as the good will is part of it. Now a good will, says Kant, is good not because of what it affects or accomplishes, it's good in itself. When I say that Kant is a critic of consequentialism I am not exaggerating. Kant doesn't think that the outcome of the act is what matters. And in an extraordinarily famous passage, famous in part because of the rather shocking translation which has come down to us of it, Kant says, "the good will would remain good, even if by the niggardly provision of step-motherly nature it wholly lacked the power to accomplish its purpose." By which he means, even if you with your good will were frustrated in all of the goals that you set out to achieve, your actions would still have moral worth. And somewhat more poetically and a bit less vocabulary that is challenging to the modern ear, Kant says, even if it didn't achieve its outcomes “it would like a jewel still shine by its own light as something which has full value in itself. Its usefulness or fruitlessness can neither augment nor its value." Now the question is this: How could anybody come to have this view? How could anybody have a view of morality that says, what matters for an act to be moral is not the outcome that it produces, but rather the description under which the act is done? What I want to try to do right now is to put you inside the Kantian picture so that you get a sense of what that worldview looks like. [...]"
“Fracassei em tudo o que tentei na vida. Tentei alfabetizar as crianças brasileiras, não consegui. Tentei salvar os índios, não consegui. Tentei fazer uma universidade séria e fracassei. Tentei fazer o Brasil desenvolver-se autonomamente e fracassei. Mas os fracassos são minhas vitórias. Eu detestaria estar no lugar de quem me venceu"
VIDEO: https://youtu.be/rc-vSvT0YuE?list=PL3F6BC200B2930084&t=27m53s <- [Eng Subs] [recorded in Spring 2011] Philosophy and the Science of Human Nature w/ Tamar Gendler; Lecture 13: Deontology; Chapter 2. Immanuel Kant and Deontology
7 comentários:
ou todos os que não sabem o que é uma CAUSA?
sim, também.
todos os que não sabem
- o que é morrer
E
- o que é viver
E
- o que é (ter) uma causa...
:*
Não.
(mudei de ideias)
"Já que não temos votos para salvar o Pantanal, vamos dar a vida para salvá-lo"
Francisco Anselmo "Franselmo" de Barros
http://www.supersitegood.com/releitura/texto.php?mat=316 <- As últimas horas do ambientalista Francelmo Barros (20/11/2005 - André Petry)
http://www1.folha.uol.com.br/fsp/cotidian/ff1411200502.htm <- Ambientalista morre após atear fogo ao própio corpo [HUDSON CORRÊA
DA AGÊNCIA FOLHA, EM SINOP (MT)]
VIDEO: http://youtu.be/KXbrSZRKykQ <- Ambientalista Francisco Anselmo de Barros, ele quem elegi para herói nestes tempos em que achar um espécime desta natureza é praticamente impossível. Era presidente da ONG Fundação para Conservação da Natureza de Mato Grosso do Sul, ateou fogo no próprio corpo durante manifestação contra a implantação de usina de álcool no Pantanal. Muitos podem achar isso um absurdo, outros podem perguntar o que adiantou? Agora eu faço essa pergunta a vocês. Até onde vocês iriam por um objetivo? Esse homem deu sua própria vida por um objetivo que ele lutou sempre, pode não ter adiantado [...]
VIDEO: https://youtu.be/AOk-5OEtWSU?list=PL3F6BC200B2930084&t=13m13s <- [Eng Subs] [recorded in Spring 2011] Philosophy and the Science of Human Nature w/ Tamar Gendler; Lecture 13: Deontology; Chapter 2. Immanuel Kant and Deontology
TRANSCRIPT: "[...] So, says Kant, a witty, persevering, rich, healthy, moderate thief will be an outstanding thief--but that doesn't make his thiefdom good. Each of the virtues that has traditionally been extolled as a virtue, says Kant, gains its value only in so far as the good will is part of it. Now a good will, says Kant, is good not because of what it affects or accomplishes, it's good in itself. When I say that Kant is a critic of consequentialism I am not exaggerating. Kant doesn't think that the outcome of the act is what matters. And in an extraordinarily famous passage, famous in part because of the rather shocking translation which has come down to us of it, Kant says, "the good will would remain good, even if by the niggardly provision of step-motherly nature it wholly lacked the power to accomplish its purpose." By which he means, even if you with your good will were frustrated in all of the goals that you set out to achieve, your actions would still have moral worth. And somewhat more poetically and a bit less vocabulary that is challenging to the modern ear, Kant says, even if it didn't achieve its outcomes “it would like a jewel still shine by its own light as something which has full value in itself. Its usefulness or fruitlessness can neither augment nor its value." Now the question is this: How could anybody come to have this view? How could anybody have a view of morality that says, what matters for an act to be moral is not the outcome that it produces, but rather the description under which the act is done? What I want to try to do right now is to put you inside the Kantian picture so that you get a sense of what that worldview looks like. [...]"
“Fracassei em tudo o que tentei na vida.
Tentei alfabetizar as crianças brasileiras, não consegui.
Tentei salvar os índios, não consegui.
Tentei fazer uma universidade séria e fracassei.
Tentei fazer o Brasil desenvolver-se autonomamente e fracassei.
Mas os fracassos são minhas vitórias.
Eu detestaria estar no lugar de quem me venceu"
Darcy Ribeiro
ERRATA:
VIDEO: https://youtu.be/rc-vSvT0YuE?list=PL3F6BC200B2930084&t=27m53s <- [Eng Subs] [recorded in Spring 2011] Philosophy and the Science of Human Nature w/ Tamar Gendler; Lecture 13: Deontology; Chapter 2. Immanuel Kant and Deontology
Enviar um comentário