Doxa

Most analyses of public opinion polling focus on questions of bias or accuracy. In contrast, this study assumes the validity of polling and instead investigates polling data as a form of rhetorical argument. While ancient and modern traditions conceive of doxa as unstated collective opinion, modern opinion polling represents a transformation of the concept of doxa in deliberative democracies. By analyzing specific polls, polling data is shown to advance implicit claims about public policy and good governance. Thus, polling data do not embody an objective empirical artifact, but rather a form of deliberative argumentation that is at odds with democratic life. The study concludes by advocating a revitalization of the public culture of contestation and by discussing more indirect, intuitive means of assessing larger opinion trends.

En este trabajo se tematiza la noción de dóxa intentando distinguirla de interpretaciones platonizantes, buscando definirla en el contexto de lo que se conoce del pensamiento parmenídeo y cuestionando si dicha noción es genuinamente metafísica o epistemológica.
Sin pretender ser un trabajo filológico pero reconociendo la importancia del lenguaje en relación a una mejor comprensión del pensamiento se ha elegido como estrategia metodológica la comparación de traducciones reconocidas. Para poder, así, analizar los comentarios filósoficos (Cordero, Heidegger) a la luz de las interpretaciones de los distintos traductores del griego al inglés, castellano, alemán y francés (Burnet, Cordero, Diels y Kranz, Gómez-Lobo, McKirahan, Míguez, Montero Moliner, Tannery y Tarán).

(Eng)  This paper grasps academic intentions of Bourdieu’s critical sociology, and discusses its practical feasibility. Bourdieu points out the academic error of “theoretical reason” common in both subjectivism and objectivism theory. He argues that theorists can overcome such an error; theorists may establish more objective sociological theories by conducting reflexive work on themselves. Bourdieu suggests that he can objectify the pre-reflexive acts and “doxic experience” of actors in his theories, called “reflexive sociology” or “field analysis theory.” They guarantee objectivity through which actors can realize social truth, the cause of pain. These intentions imply the premise of the theorist’s epistemological superiority.
  I embody Bourdieu’s argument, and seek how his emancipatory interest can exert a liberating effect in the practitioner’s practice space. In order to do this, I ask three questions: “Can theorists abandon the epistemological superiority of intellectuals?” “Can a synthetic social theory actually be able to carry out the critique?” and “What should we do to offer criticism as a sociologist?” I apply Bourdieu’s theory to the case of “sexual harassment by Pastor Byung-Wook Jeon,” a representing sexual crime case in Korean Protestantism. By analyzing Bourdieu’s concepts such as “habitus, illusio, field, symbolic capital, and symbolic violence” revealed in the Jeon’s sexual crime case, it can be understood that Bourdieu’s theory is an academically excellent explanatory framework.
  However, there are four difficulties that theorists with interest in liberation confront in having a conversation with actors, apart from the explanatory power of the theory. They reveal how demanding it is for the critical work of theory to have a liberating effect on the world of practice, and achieve substantive change. The four challenges are as followed: The fact that the interest of theorists and actors differs in the first place, the fact that actors cannot accept the concepts and terms used in the sociology discipline as well as theorists do, and that actors do not easily accept the epistemological superiority of theorists. Finally, even if actors practiced as taught by theorists, liberal change is not guaranteed to be made.
  I take a step further and attempt to rebut criticisms presented above on the Bourdieu logic. Bourdieu argues the possibility to start an open dialogue with actors by employing their interest with his research method called “participant objectivation,” translating academic terms into everyday terms used by actors. This method could be more effective as theorists could guide the direction of conversation towards liberation. In this way, actors may understand the concepts as well as theorists do. In addition, the actors whom Bourdieu encountered evidence Bourdieu’s claims, since they acknowledged his academic authority and epistemological superiority as a theorist, and expressed gratitude to him. Bourdieu sets the objective criteria for liberation by specifically suggesting “relational, linguistic, and situational conditions” that enable the society to be liberated through sociology.
Still, the fundamental limitations of the theory remain. Actors may not pay attention to the theorists’ interests and practices, and reject objectification interventions internally or externally. Furthermore, the liberating effect that Bourdieu desires requires pre-achievement of many conditions that cannot be acquired at the same time. In the end, in order for actors to accept the authority that theorists behold, and to undergo liberating experience, they must rely on the contingency created by human beings and their social world. Therefore, a theory is a mere dialogue as a part of conversation, and the only thing that theorists can do is to communicate with actors. What actors choose, at the end, is a matter of persuasion.

(Kor)  본 논문은 부르디외의 비판 사회학이 가진 학문적 의도를 파악하고, 그 의도의 실질적 실현 가능성을 논증한다. 부르디외는 주관주의와 객관주의 이론이 공통적으로 가진 ‘이론적 이성’(theoretical reason)이라는 학문적 오류를 지적하면서, 이론가가 스스로에 대한 성찰적 작업을 해야만 보다 객관적인 사회학 이론을 정립할 수 있다고 주장한다. 부르디외는 객관성을 담보한 ‘성찰적 사회학’ 혹은 ‘장 분석 이론’으로 불리는 자신의 이론으로 행위자들의 전성찰적인 행위와 ‘독사적 경험’(doxic experience)을 객관화하여, 행위자들이 사회적 진실과 고통의 원인을 깨닫게 할 수 있다고 생각한다. 그러한 의도에는 이론가의 ‘인식론적 우월성’이라는 전제가 내포되어 있다.
연구자는 부르디외의 논의를 따라가면서 그의 해방적 이해 관심이 행위자의 실천 영역에서 얼마나 해방의 효과를 발휘할 수 있는지 확인하고자 한다. 이를 위해 ‘지식인의 인식론적 우월성을 버릴 수 있는가?’, ‘실제로 종합적 비판 사회 이론이 비판을 수행할 수 있는가?’, ‘사회학자로서 비판을 수행하기 위해서는 어떻게 해야 하는가?’라는 세 가지 문제의식을 제기하고, 한국 개신교의 대표적 성범죄 사건인 ‘전병욱 목사 성추행 사건’을 연구 대상으로 삼아 부르디외의 이론을 적용해보고, 분석한다. ‘하비투스, 일루지오, 장, 상징 자본과 상징 폭력’과 같은 개념들을 ‘전병욱 목사 성추행 사건’에 대입하여 분석함으로써 부르디외 이론이 학문적으로 탁월한 설명 틀임을 확인할 수 있다.
  하지만 이론가가 해방적 이해 관심을 가지고 행위자와의 대화를 진행하면서 겪게 되는 네 가지 난점은 이론의 현실 설명력과는 별개로 이론의 비판적 작업이 실천 세계에 해방적 영향을 미치고 실질적인 변화까지 달성하기가 얼마나 어려운 것인지 밝혀준다. 여기서 네 가지 난점이란 ‘이론가와 행위자의 이해 관심이 애초에 다르다는 점, 행위자가 사회학 학문 장에서 사용되는 개념과 용어를 이론가만큼 잘 수용할 수 없다는 점, 이론가가 전제하는 인식론적 우월성을 행위자가 쉽게 받아들이지 않는다는 점, 마지막으로 행위자가 이론가의 가르침대로 실천한다 해도 실제로 해방적 변화가 도래하기 어렵다는 점’이다.
연구자는 한 발 더 나가 앞서 제기된 비판점들에 대해 부르디외의 논리로 재반박을 시도한다. 부르디외의 입장에서는 ‘참여 객관화’라는 자신만의 연구 방법으로 행위자와 얼마든지 이해 관심을 연동하여 개방적인 대화를 시작할 수 있고, 학문적 용어를 행위자가 사용하는 일상적 용어로 번역하고 대화의 전략도 해방을 유도하는 방향으로 바꾼다면 얼마든지 이론가의 개념을 행위자가 납득할 수 있다는 것이다. 뿐만 아니라 부르디외가 실제로 만난 행위자들은 이론가의 학문적 권위와 인식론적 우월함을 인정하고 그에게 감사를 표현함으로써 부르디외 이론을 지지하는 증거가 된다. 그리고 부르디외는 사회학을 통해 해방된 사회가 가능하다고 주장하면서 이를 가능케 하는 ‘관계적 · 언어적 · 상황적 조건’을 구체적으로 제시하여 객관적인 해방의 기준을 설정하고 있다.
  그럼에도 근본적인 한계는 남는다. 행위자는 여전히 이론가의 관심과 실천에 대해 귀 기울이지 않으며, 학자의 객관화 개입을 내적으로나 외적으로 거부할 것이기 때문이다. 그리고 부르디외가 희망하는 해방의 효과는 ‘동시에 달성될 수 없는 수많은 조건의 선이행’을 요구한다. 결국, 행위자가 이론가의 권위를 받아들이고 실제로 해방적 경험을 하려면, 인간이라는 존재와 이들이 형성하는 실천 세계가 가진 우연적 특성에 의존할 수밖에 없다. 그러므로 이론은 하나의 대화이며, 이론가는 행위자와 대화를 이어나갈 수 있을 뿐이다. 행위자가 어떤 선택을 하는가는 설득의 문제인 것이다.

Hannah Arendt disavowed the title of “philosopher,” and is known above all as a political theorist. But the relationship between philosophy and politics animates her entire oeuvre. We find her addressing the topic in The Human Condition (1958), in Between Past and Future (a collection of essays written in the early 1960s), and in Men in Dark Times (another collection of essays, this one from the late sixties). It is treated in her Lectures on Kant’s Political Philosophy, composed during the seventies, and also in the posthumous Life of the Mind, two of three projected volumes of which were complete when she died in 1975. Certainly, Arendt’s thought cannot be understood without taking into account her deep suspicion of and equally deep commitment to philosophy in the context of political reflection. For all that, her writings on this abiding preoccupation do not gel into a systematically articulated theory or programmatic statement. Instead, they reflect Arendt’s appreciation of what remained for her a “vital tension” – an enigma.

GOD NOT WORKING FOR YOU?
THESE PAGES EXPLAIN HOW FAKE HISTORY, RELIGIOUS PROPAGANDA AND A CENSORED EDUCATION CORRUPTED YOUR LIFE.
THERE IS A REASON WHY YOU EXIST. KNOW IT NOW!
ESCAPE THE MADNESS. YOU AREN'T WATCHING LIFE'S MOVIE; YOU ARE THE MOVIE.

THE PAGES OF THIS BOOK CONTAIN ALL THE INFORMATION YOU WILL NEED IN LIFE. IT IS A RESTORATION OF PARMENIDES', ABOUT REALITY, 2,000 YEARS OVERDUE. THIS EXCITING WORK IS A REVOLUTION IN THOUGHT REVEALING THE SECRET ANCIENT KNOWLEDGE OF EXISTENCE. IT'S BREATHTAKING REVELATIONS EXPLAIN HOW FAKE HISTORY AND RELIGIOUS AGENDAS CORRUPTED THE ANCIENT WISDOM AND THEREBY RETARDED HUMAN EVOLUTION. WHERE DID I COME FROM? WHY AM I HERE? HAS THE MODERN WORLD GOT IT WRONG? YES! THERE IS A REASON WHY YOU EXIST. KNOW IT NOW!
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B08733MP25

This article focuses on the issues of the «integration» and/as «cultural subalternity» of migrants in Italy. It aims at discussing some concepts developed by Pierre Bourdieu, such as symbolic violence, habitus, and doxa, reflecting on two ethnographic studies. The first one, conducted between 2004 and 2008, was about migrants from the Dolj Department in Romania, employed in the construction sector in Bologna. The second study started in 2010 and is about migrants from Western Africa - in particular from the Boulgou province in Burkina Faso - employed on a seasonal basis in agriculture in Puglia and Basilicata. By describing representations and practices of these two groups, on the one hand the article shows how some discourses on immigration in Italy are embodied by the migrants themselves: this seems to confirm Bourdieu's theory of symbolic violence. On the other hand, the field research revealed the presence of «illegitimate» representations and practices: as different kinds and sources of symbolic power are at work in this context, migrants can (at least in part) «emancipate» themselves from the dominant "doxa".

Keywords: Habitus; Doxa; Subaltern Integration; Bourdieu; Ethnography.

En 1936, en su última obra, Crisis, Husserl afirma que la filosofía ejerce una función orientadora con respecto a la cultura. El propósito de esta investigación es mostrar que la caracterización del filósofo como "funcionario de la humanidad" está en estrecha conexión con la fenomenología de la experiencia: ciencia de la ‘doxa’, ciencia del mundo de la vida. En la década del treinta, Husserl desarrolla una fenomenología de la facticidad, fenomenología de la subjetividad trascendental, cuyo carácter es monádico, pero cuyo ser tan solo adviene real mediante relaciones intersubjetivas. La ciencia del mundo de la vida permite establecer que en la raíz de la crisis de la cultura occidental se encuentran el 'dualismo psico-físico', el 'objetivismo' y el 'naturalismo'. Para superarlos se requiere revalorizar la doxa, y mostrar cómo en ella tiene lugar la constitución, el a priori, del mundo de la vida.

Mitä nykykoteja koristavat englanninkieliset iskulauseet ja sanat kertovat kodin asukkaasta? Huoneentaulut ja vastaavat opastavat tai julistavat kotoisat viisaudet eivät ole uusi ilmiö, mutta niiden meemimäinen, lausuvasta auktoriteetista irtautunut olemus on. Sisustustekstit ovat nykyään leimallisesti itsestä itselle kertomista hetkellisyyttä
korostavassa preesensissä. Siksi ne ovat kiehtova esimerkki puhetapojamme läpäisevästä self-help-kulttuurista sekä kliseisyyden ja jaettavuuden jännitteisestä suhteesta: Be yourself, mutta ole sitä kulttuurisesti jaettavalla tavalla. Sisustustekstien eetoksen voi paljastaa
asettamalla ne dialogiin kaunokirjallisuuden viisaus- ja self-help-tradition kanssa.

Paul enigmatically describes humanity’s universal sinfulness in Rom. 3.23 as a lack of ‘the glory of God’. Interpreters have tried to situate the lack of this glory in various contexts: ancient honour discourse, ancient Jewish Adam traditions, and Paul’s ethical discourse. To interpret this passage, this article utilizes the literary context of glory language throughout the letter. From this we find that glory denotes not only elevated honour, but also incorruption. Thus, the lack of glory in 3.23 refers to mortality and shame as the result of sin. In addition, this study of glory has implications for the burgeoning interest into the question of theosis with regard to Pauline theology.

Este artículo se enfoca en la revisión de la Retórica de Aristóteles que Martin Heidegger ofreció durante el semestre de verano de 1924. Mi objetivo es destacar algunos aspectos de esa revisión que, a pesar de no haber repercutido mucho en el horizonte de la pregunta por el ser, contribuyen al redescubrimiento y revalorización del papel de la retórica no sólo para el planteamiento heideggeriano, sino en el ámbito filosófico contemporáneo en general. En concreto, se trata de la caracterización de la retórica como hermenéutica, como posibilidad, como escucha y, sobre todo, como la primera investigación acerca del λόγος entendido como lenguaje. El artículo busca destacar aspectos que no enfatizan otras interpretaciones en torno a las contribuciones de Heidegger respecto del llamado “giro retórico”.

Distinction Between Episteme And Doxa in Plato's Epistemology
This study titled as “The Distinction between the Episteme and Doxa in the Philosophy of Plato” begins with a summary of the epistemic adventure in the philosophy of Plato. Until the time of Plato, the epistemic discussions had proceeded and ceased with disagreement and transformed into a relativist admission. This relativity which was crowned by the thoughts of Protagoras and Gorgias reached its antithesis with Socrates and Plato. Plato started his antithesis by ridiculing the previous types of sophist thoughts and paid attention to the possibility of knowledge. According to Plato the basic principle for the possibility of knowledge is the theory of ideas which is the subject of differentiation of visible world and the other. This distinction which is discussed in two different statues in terms of epistemic value too effects directly the distinction between the episteme and the doxa. Therefore, the first thing which was done by Plato is to clarify the distinction between the episteme and the doxa. The difference between the concepts and the objects are put forward in this distinction and that the objects are being the subject of the continuous change, the difficulty of their description are linked to that the objects does not allow knowledge. This situation which is described as “doxa” is softened first and then characterized as “right doxa” when the mathematical (geometrical) objects comes into question. But in this step, doxa and right doxa are mentioned, not the knowledge. The basic criterion in the determination of doxa is the “change”. Plato prefers to call knowledge as “episteme” that is precisely far from change In the result of the discussions made in dialogues, Plato tested the distinction between the “episteme” and the “doxa” in terms of their subjects and how those are gained. According to this, Plato accepts the entities individually as the subject of doxa and the ideas as the subject of episteme. As for how those are gained, while doxa is gained by the means of the senses, episteme is gained by the thought. The result of this distinction is that we can have knowledge (episteme) about the divine and unchanging ideas while we can have opinions (doxa) about the humane samples concerning the senses and the objects which are the subject of change. As a result, Plato accepts the gods worthy of the knowledge of ideal perfection and he considers the philosophers as closest to this. As for the philodoxes who have doxa, they are placed at the bottom of the epistemic value grading. Our study aims to present the mentioned distinctions systematically.

dominasi tidak melulu berlangsung secara kasat mata (fisik) namun dominasi berlangsung pula pada ranah-ranah simbolik (posisi seks, mitos, ritual, dll). DIsini melalui Dominasi Maskulin karya Bourdieu dominasi yang sedemikian halus akan dicoba untuk mulai dipertanyakan sekaligus dipersoalkan.

Can knowledge have a history? Plato's emphatic differentiation between episteme (ἐπιστήμη) and doxa (δόξα) clearly points to an ahistoricity of episteme, which, unlike doxa (an opinion or a belief) refers to eternal ideas or to pure being which is not subjected to temporal or historical transformations. In my lecture, I try to show how the original ahistoricity of episteme, on which the philosophical and scientific epistemologies are based, was always presupposed by a secure epistemological referentiality – i.e. by a secure or safe epistemological access to pure ideas. Already in antiquity we can recognize many strategic preferences in terms of subject's epistemological reference to the object of knowledge. In comparison with Plato, Aristotle attempted to reverse the epistemological referentiality, so that scientific knowledge refers to natural phenomena, i.e. to sensible objects. With such an epistemological referentiality of knowledge, one clearly faces the inconsistencies of being that are inherent in natural phenomena (and which Plato strategically avoided through exclusive epistemological references to eternal ideas). The inconsistencies of objective being led to phenomenal aporias that characterized many of the Aristotelian discourses within the framework of his Metaphysics and Natural Philosophy. The medieval scholasticism inherited the ancient aporias that found various expressions in the aporetic discourses of the medieval natural philosophy (philosophia naturalis). The early modern age of Descartes and Newton tried to terminate the aporetics, which were characteristically represented in the medieval discourses on mechanical phenomena such as impetus, gravity, space, time, infinitesimal etc., the major tool for this termination being the strategic axiomatization of philosophical and scientific knowledge. Consequently, the axioms should establish themselves as stable and final cognitions and thus prove to be ahistorical. However, the Cartesian-epistemological turn had led to further problems of epistemological referentiality. The epistemological-referential access to objects seemed once again to be hampered by many new obstacles, as represented by mathematical formalism, pictorial representations of natural phenomena, and by historical contexts and paradigms of science. The problems of epistemological referentiality, which had emerged at the dawn of early modern age in mathematical and mechanical axiomatization of natural-philosophical knowledge, seemed to re-establish the historicity of scientific knowledge. In my lecture I try to explain – by means of a few examples from mechanics and optics – the emergence of the historicity of scientific knowledge in modern age.

Soundcloud Link: https://soundcloud.com/user-725946454/the-historicity-of-knowledge

Resumen Este trabajo expone el modo en que el acervo territorial determina las estructuras de poder en las dinámicas sociales en una urbe como Santiago de Chile. La existencia de grupos secluídos y la naturalización de esta situación contribuyen al surgimiento de un "habitus territorial" y de una "doxa de la segregación". En este marco se propone el concepto de "capital territorial", que escapa a la tradicional clasificación sociopolítica de derechas e izquierdas, actuando como factor relevante de segregación para los habitantes de la ciudad, complementario pero independiente del acceso a herramientas tradicionales de movilidad social como educación o empleo. Resumo Este trabalho expõe a maneira como o acervo territorial determina as estruturas de poder na dinâmica social em uma cidade como Santiago, Chile. A existência de grupos isolados e a naturalização dessa situação contribuem para o surgimento de um "habitus territorial" e de uma "doxa de segregação". Nesse contexto, propõe-se o conceito de "capital territorial", que foge à classificação sociopolítica tradicional de direitas e esquerdas, atuando como um fator de segregação relevante para os habitantes da cidade, complementar, mas independente do acesso a ferramentas tradicionais de mobilidade social, como educação ou emprego. Palavras-chave: segregação, poder, capital territorial, habitus,[elite, não elite, sociopolítica]

This paper reconstructs the conception of epistēmē advanced in Plato’s Republic and defends the claim that epistēmē of perceptibles is impossible from two long-standing objections: that it is philosophically implausible and that it undermines Socrates’ argument that philosophers should rule. The paper argues that epistēmē consists in grasping how a fact either is a fact about or is grounded in facts about natures. It was thus natural for Socrates to rule out epistēmē of perceptibles, since the fact (as he sees it) that predicates apply to perceptibles only in certain circumstances plausibly entails that facts about perceptibles are not appropriately grounded in facts about natures. Nevertheless, philosophers’ opinions (doxai) concerning perceptibles are authoritative because they are informed by their epistēmē of intelligibles (in an analogous way, it is here suggested, to how doctors’ medical opinions concerning particular matters of health are authoritative because they are informed by their understanding of health).

This short paper deals with Parmenides' fragments B1 (28-32) and B8 (51-61). I claim that Parmenides' doxa is intrinsically ambivalent, being on the one hand 'deception', on the other 'appearance'. A number of passages of later authors, who seem to draw on Parmenides, seems to confirm this: Plato, Resp. V 477a-480a; Aristoteles, Metaph. A 986b28-33; Theophrastus Phys. I; Simplicius, In Arist. Phys. IX 38, 20-28 Diels, and In Arist. De cael. VII 557, 21-23 Heiberg. In fact, the terms used by Parmenides bear such ambivalence especially at B1, 28-32, where the semantic affinity between doxa, dokounta, and dokimos is patent.

Versione italiana originale del testo pubblicato in lingua inglese

L'orizzonte interpretativo entro cui questo lavoro si inserisce è quello della discussione del rapporto tra la dottrina dell'essere e quella dell'opinione nel poema di Parmenide. Rifiutando la prospettiva di una qualche separazione o opposizione tra le due parti in cui esso tradizionalmente viene diviso, sostengo la tesi dell'unità teorica del Poema. Dopo aver mostrato come una tale unità sia richiesta dall'impianto generale del pensiero di Parmenide, individuo nel frammento 4 il luogo in cui Parmenide articola il passaggio tra le due dottrine. Il Poema offre pertanto una positiva visione della realtà, dove l'ontologia pone le premesse di un'originale spiegazione dei fenomeni naturali.

En muchos países latinoamericanos se ha establecido el delito de «feminicidio» o «femicidio»; sin embargo, pese a usar la misma etiqueta, los hechos que se consideran jurídicamente relevantes en cada país son distintos. En atención a ello, esos tipos penales latinoamericanos pueden clasificarse considerando la importancia que parecen atribuirle a la prueba de las motivaciones del hombre acusado de matar a una mujer por razones de género. Dados los distintos escenarios resultantes a partir de esa clasificación, los problemas probatorios que se enfrentan en la aplicación del feminicidio en cada regulación nacional son sumamente diversos. Así pues, este artículo analiza la interrelación entre el modo en que se formulan las normas penales sustantivas y los problemas probatorios que surgen en su aplicación.

Sweden’s recent demographic changes and widespread cultural diversity unfortunately also means considerable differences and inequalities between groups’ societal integration (SCB [Statistics Sweden] 2019). This study aims to contribute to the understanding of these differences, and asks: Is there a dominant form of power active in Sweden that carries a national signature? Can broadly demanded properties linked to tacit notions of “Swedishness” have a significance for the objective relations between Swedes, and their unequal integration into the existing “majority Sweden” and thereby official Sweden? If such a form of power exists, can it then be conceptualized through what we already know about species of “symbolic capital”? If so, what is Swedish capital? The study is explorative and develops the idea that Swedish capital—a concept emphasising the national dimension of Pierre Bourdieu’s “cultural capital”—today is a pervasive form of power, recognized, albeit habitually misrecognized, in most social fields in Sweden. This first attempt to construct the concept will be carried out as a meta study of select previous research, aiming at identifying indicators of active Swedish capital, thematise the findings (“Swedish dominance”; “Swedish passage”; “Swedish doxa”) and further deepen the analysis by considering Swedish capital’s dynamic, economic, and topological aspects. All to refine the understanding of contemporary multicultural and class differentiated Sweden.

Through Heidegger’s reading of Aletheia, Arendt links the notion of truth to appearance at the expense of dismantling the well-known dichotomy between true being and mere appearance, displacing truth from the domain of noumena to the realm of phenomena
which is the realm of visibility, the doxastic domain of political action. Doxa as uncovering no longer leads to the cognitive adequation of the inner self, but rather to Arendt’s main interpersonal dimension of men into the appearing world: who we are in the public space. Thus, it will be asserted that there is by no means sheer contradiction between the dialectics and persuasion. It will also be claimed that Arendt displaces the positive account of doxa toward her considerations on the faculty of judging, reinforcing the primacy of communicability, plurality and diversity of viewpoints in building up someone’s doxa, in how one constitutes ones particular view and uniqueness, into the world. Finally, friendship is claimed to hold the political kind of insight par excellence, as the praxis of seeing the world from the other’s viewpoint.

El presente trabajo pretende demostrar como si bien un ordenamiento sin ningún tipo de regla del precedente resulta disfuncional, tanto la identificación de su ratio decidendi como sus condiciones de aplicación resultan altamente indeterminadas. Para demostrar tal tesis se procede mediante cuatro pasos. En primer lugar, se intenta esclarecer el concepto de precedente, adoptando un concepto amplio, y analizando en qué sentidos aquellos pueden ser vinculantes. En segundo lugar, se plantea la pregunta acerca de cuándo podemos afirmar que un ordenamiento jurídico contiene una regla del precedente vinculante. En tercer lugar, se presentan algunos problemas en la identificación de la ratio decidendi del precedente. En cuarto lugar, se analizan algunas de las distintas operaciones que se pueden realizar con un precedente. Por último se proponen algunas conclusiones provisionales.

The hermeneutical horizon of my
work is provided by the extent of the discussion
of the relationship between the doctrine of the
truth and the doctrine of opinion as are dealt
with in Parmenidean thought and work.
Rejecting the vision of any separation or
opposition between the two parts in which the
Parmenidean poem has traditionally been
divided, I argue in favour of its theoretical unity.
In this way, the ontology lays the foundations
for an innovative explanation of natural
phenomena. After having highlighted how this
unity is required by the general structure of
Parmenides' thought, I show how the B4 DK
fragment represents the place where Parmenides
constructs the passage from ontology to the
explanation of natural phenomena.