O artigo apresenta uma análise cronológica da recepção de Kierkegaard em Portugal. Na primeira parte, analisam-se as traduções até agora publicadas em língua portuguesa, contextualizando-as no panorama filosófico e literário em que vieram a lume; na segunda parte, comentam-se os artigos de diversos quadrantes que, sensivelmente, desde a década de quarenta do século passado foram publicados em Portugal, realçando-se ainda o papel desempenhado por alguns desses comentadores na divulgação de Kierkegaard. É dado particular relevo às mais recentes traduções realizadas a partir do original dinamarquês, bem como ao lugar ocupado na actualidade pelo filósofo, na investigação e no ensino, nas universidades portuguesas.

The aim of this article is to analyse the concept of mundanity (verdslighed) in Kierkegaard’s works and his dialogue with the Augustine tradition. This concept can be too secularization in Kierkegaard’s thought, for this motive we use it in double sense. For our purpose we analyse specially the Augustine’s book XV of City of God (The two cities in the Land) and the Kierkegaard’s discourse The Changelessness of God (1855).

The article proposes a thought reading of Kierkegaard about the subjectivity problem inside the historical period that in the philosophy was known as German idealism, talking with the three German thought larger representatives: Fichte, Schelling and Hegel.

The same criticism of unreal abstraction, and empty universality repeats from Hegel to romandes, and from Kierkegaard to them and to him. The current article aims at inquiring the conceptual consistence of that criticism, approaching the essential content of their thoughts, and finally setting forth a possible speculative continuity, which would extend from first Romanticism to Hegel, and from him to Kierkegaard, for coming at last even to us.

Le présent article offre une brève réflexion sur la présence de la pensée de Søren Kierkegaard dans le cycle de l’Absurde de l’oeuvre d’Albert Camus. On essayera demontrer comment, en partageant un climat philosophique marqué par l’exaltation du paradoxe et la contradiction entant que signes distinctifs de l’existence concrète de l’individu, les deux auteurs se séparent en ce qui concerne les conséquences qui découlent de la considération de l’absurdité de la condition humaine. En prenant Camus en tant que lecteur de Kierkegaard, le propos de cette étude sera donc, plutôt qu’une exposition étendue des deux pensées, celui de dévoiler les principaux thèmes de la réflexion kierkegaardienne qu ’il faut tenir en compte pour comprendre, en contraposition à celle-ci, toute l ’originalité de la pensée camusienne.

At the beginning of his philosophical production, Habermas notes a collapse of religious conscience that leads to mass atheism. With the shift to modem thought, the religious world interpretations were depreciate in its categorical system, and its character as unifier seal on the whole of social integration was gradually undermined and replaced by reason. Purposes of the texts of the 1980s, we find a new direction on the treatment given to the philosophical issue of religion, with the record of its legitimacy, unique form and recognition of its right to coexist with post-metaphysical thought. At texts of this Century, Habermas admits that the root of his thought is nourished by the Christian héritage, and that Christianity is not only a precursor figure to modernity normative self-comprehension, because the egalitarian universalism which arose ideas of solidarity living, conduct o f independent living and emancipation, human rights and democracy, is an immediate inheritance of Jewish ethics and Christian ethics of love. At this work, it's first exposed the gradual structuring of that thought, then it’s seek, at the later Habermasian diagnosis, what has changed. There would be a theological construction within Habermas thought?

Backing his theory on a consequencialist doctrine, Peter Singer has fought for animal rights, pointing human beings as primarily responsible for animal suffering. Defending his position to the limit, Singer claims that some animals should be considered as persons. Likewise he argues that some human beings, such as babies, young children and disabled individuals, are not persons. Rejecting his point of view and supporting my position in a specist perspective, it seems obvious to me the difference between animals and humans and the consequent difference of status. I wonder how we can consider a chimpanzee as a person. And how is it possible to say that a child is not? Evaluating these issues and challenging Peter Singer we will discover what it takes to be a person.

This paper is a reconstruction of Levinas’ reading of Hegel and his understanding of violence (of the enemy and the war). Combining Franz Rosenzweig’s reflections which concem the sick philosopher and Hegel’s State, as well as Derrida’s interpretation of the different attributes of violence, our aim is also to give full evidence of Derrida’s critical reading of Levinas. The first part illustrates the various classifications of the figures of violence from the different periods of Hegel’s life and the traces that these figures have left in Levinas’ texts beginning with „Liberté et commandement” in 1953. In the second part we discuss Hegel’s well-known analogy from his Rechtsphilosophie on sovereignty and the organism - that is to say the parallel reading of some paragraphs of Naturphilosophie too - and the relation between totality and violence, in Levinas’ “ontology as allergy” and in Derrida’s autoimmunology.

“A Crisis on Education” was written in the same period (1956-57) of The Human Condition and might be read as a complementary text, reflecting upon an institution that had been left out of the book albeit its critical role in linking the private and public spheres: the school. This reading of Hannah Arendt’s “A Crisis on Education” follows closely the arguments of the author, establishing connections with other authors whenever appropriate. The presences of Kant and Hegel are signaled in particular, as predecessors of some of the key arguments in Arendt’s essay. The final paragraphs offer an analysis of, and a reply to Alain Renaut’s criticism to that essay in his La Fin de l'Autorité (Flammarion, 2004).

As in no other age of human history, the beginning of the 21st Century faces challenges in which both the human race and the planet Earth are at stake. The main note of these challenges is its planetary scope, what leads Ulrich Beck to define our society as a World Risk Society. According to Beck, the problems faced by the World Risk Society can only corne to an end through an effort of international cooperation in political institutions and through a new interpretation of the concept of cosmopolitanism as an element of a new political culture. In this article, we intend to expose the way Beck approaches the concept of Cosmopolitanism suited to the reality of the 21st Century’s challenges.