Entre ceticismo e esperança: oscilações na teoria política de Judith Shklar

This dissertation explores the work of Judith Shklar, reconciling two central dimensions of her thought: political skepticism and political hope. Shklar is often presented as a skeptical philosopher, whose negative approach prioritizes vices and injustice, rejecting grand utopias and systems. Howeve...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor: Silva, João Manoel Bentes Nonato da
Tipo de recurso: tesis de maestría
Estado:Versión publicada
Fecha de publicación:2025
País:Brasil
Institución:Pontifícia Universidade Católica de São Paulo (PUC-SP)
Repositorio:Repositório Institucional da PUC_SP
Idioma:portugués
OAI Identifier:oai:repositorio.pucsp.br:handle/44353
Acceso en línea:https://repositorio.pucsp.br/jspui/handle/handle/44353
Access Level:acceso abierto
Palabra clave:CNPQ::CIENCIAS HUMANAS::FILOSOFIA
Judith Shklar
Ceticismo político
Esperança política
Liberalismo agonístico
Teoria política e literatura
Political skepticism
Political hope
Agonistic liberalism
Political theory and literature
Descripción
Sumario:This dissertation explores the work of Judith Shklar, reconciling two central dimensions of her thought: political skepticism and political hope. Shklar is often presented as a skeptical philosopher, whose negative approach prioritizes vices and injustice, rejecting grand utopias and systems. However, she is also a hopeful thinker, seeking to raise her readers’ awareness of the complexities of individual freedom and social diversity, with the aim of forming the foundations of a liberal character. The first chapter will situate these two tendencies — skepticism and hope — within the obligations and commitments of liberalism, emphasizing that the constant oscillation between the two functions, in Shklar’s work, as a method. The following chapter will discuss Shklar’s political skepticism. This style of skepticism prioritizes everyday history and common psychic experience as sources of political and normative knowledge, incorporating conflict as a central element of a liberalism that can be described as agonistic, insofar as it values the use of freedom as an instrument of contestation. The third chapter examines Shklar’s political hope as a consequence of her skepticism: in the absence of transcendent laws of reason, nature, religion, or history, it is up to the common individual to shape their social environment. This recognition grants imagination and hope a political role, without, however, resorting to transformative utopias. Her later work assumes this function by promoting a political sensibility aimed at building a liberal character, whose psychic foundation is the acceptance of moral uncertainty and diversity. Such liberal political sensibility, as well as the commitments it demands, are advanced through a kind of negative moral education that connects her political theory to literature in a quite distinctive way. The last chapter adopts a more essayistic tone. By relating Shklar’s political theory to the concept of metamodernism, it argues that her “oscillatory method”, navigating between skepticism and hope, deeply engages with the political tensions contemporary liberal democracies face