JUSTEN, Janine; AMARAL, Marcio Tavares D". Informação hoje: fazer jornalístico e capital na pós-modernidade. Iniciacom: revista brasileira de iniciacao cientifica em comunicacao social, v. 5, p. 1-23, 2013.

AMARAL, Marcio Tavares D". Notas breves sobre a amizade. Tempo Brasileiro, v. 191, p. 85-92, 2012.

AMARAL, Marcio Tavares D". História, Filosofia, Religião: sobre um campo novo e suas semeaduras. In: AMARAL, Marcio Tavares D". (org.). História, Filosofia, Religião: conversações. Rio de Janeiro: E-papers, 2014, p. 9-24.

AMARAL, Marcio Tavares D". Sobre Tempos e História: o paradoxo pós-moderno. In: SANTORO, Fernando; FOGEL, Gilvan; AMARAL, Gisele; SCHUBACK, Márcia (orgs.). Pensamento no Brasil - Emmanuel Carneiro Leão. Rio de Janeiro: Hexis - Fundação Biblioteca Nacional, 2010, p. 351-369.

History, Philosophy, Religion: interfaces in post-modern communicational culture

Description

The project aims to deepen studies on the formation and identity of contemporary Western culture, recovering its two original sources: Greek culture, based on Being and Reason, and Jewish culture based on the foundations of Faith and God. It is dedicated to developing a history of the paradigms of Western culture from its origin, from the confluence of its two sources, until the moment when it is said that history is over. Throughout the research on this history of paradigms, we seek to identify the movements of approach, refutation and discontinuity between the foundations of Faith and Reason experienced in the History-Philosophy-Religion system. The purpose of the Project is to expand studies and reflections on the efficacy regime as a contemporary cultural paradigm, as well as to verify its causes, effects and developments in the present time. The project elaborated from the results and unfolding of the investigations in relation to the hypotheses and the objectives proposed in three previous research projects: "Communication and transcendence: the challenge of the current culture, between the modern and the contemporary" (2000 to 2003); "A science of communication is still possible? The problem of Evil in contemporary culture" (2003 to 2006); And "Investigation of the system of thinking religion in the contemporary communicational field: a new look at the truth" (2007-2010). It became problematic to continue to say real, truth, ground as if it were safe things. To have with the world, the real, a relationship such that, unveiled its foundations, from it could be grasped the truth, and say it - this has become totally not obvious. The culture of communication, which puts subjects in contact around the real, of the fact to be communicated, and together they find their meaning (truth), began to give way to an information culture, in which it is no longer a question of subjects In a communication loop, but of operators, of virtual, of simulations / simulacra, under the regency of technological effectiveness. Put that word, efficacy, in the radical term dimension of a new cultural formation, is not innocent word. Speak things about power. Excludes. It says what can and what can not be. What that word says may be this. The culture that is still called the Western has worked for almost two and a half millennia, asking why they are things for their reason and identifying that motivation with the empire of causes that are knowable and communicable. Time went by, and at the end of the twentieth century these ancient evidences were interdicted. Everything came to be experienced only by its capacity to effect, to effect, to produce effects, to store, to store information. From foundation-communication to effectiveness-information: one can tell this story. There are still causes, of course, and sometimes it is extremely important to know them - for example, to assign political responsibilities. And when something happens, and it can not be unknown, it is still necessary to know of its foundation, so as not to deceive itself with appearances. Only, in the face of the high potency of being effective, causes and foundations become less relevant, less interesting - it is less important to be inside them than to be inside. Being inside means being carried away by the flow of information and consumption. It was at this point in history, at the time of the 1980s, that the discourse of the hegemonic tendency, called "postmodern", came on the scene. It is a declaratory, non-reflexive discourse that does not recognize thickness and density of thought, which denies it its radical, critical force. Not because it is a superficial way of thinking, but because it is not a way of thinking. This speech looked at the real for the last time and found it uninteresting. Because it is only one, and the virtual, strong of its techno-logical efficacy, is many, it is indeterminately all possibilities of effecting (it is no longer a question of causes). It is as if the rationalists and empiricists of the first modern had been right in excluding the real (the sensible) from the plane of knowledge. As if. Because recognition comes late, the "postmodern" can not think of the "death" of the real. To think it would be to assess their burden of truth, and truth requires the recognition of foundations, and fundamentals no longer exist, they say. In the realm of the virtual, it is the infinite remission of image, image, image, without reference to a real that could (even losing the bet) propose true. A kind of nominalism that has also come late, because there is no more universal, whose real or semiological nature can still be cared for.