{"id":8084,"date":"2021-01-29T22:46:49","date_gmt":"2021-01-29T20:46:49","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/nyje.al\/?p=8084"},"modified":"2024-09-13T11:27:19","modified_gmt":"2024-09-13T09:27:19","slug":"hegeli-mbi-te-ardhmen-hegeli-ne-te-ardhmen-sllavoj-zhizhek","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/nyje.al\/sq\/hegeli-mbi-te-ardhmen-hegeli-ne-te-ardhmen-sllavoj-zhizhek\/","title":{"rendered":"Hegeli mbi t\u00eb ardhmen, Hegeli n\u00eb t\u00eb ardhmen- Sllavoj Zhizhek"},"content":{"rendered":"\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t

P\u00ebrkthim| Genc Shehu| 29.01.2021| nyje.al\u00a0<\/strong><\/span><\/p>

Teksti i m\u00ebposht\u00ebm \u00ebsht\u00eb marr\u00eb nga philosophynow.org<\/em> <\/a><\/span><\/strong>shkruar nga Slavoj Zizek si recens\u00eb e botimit t\u00eb vitit 2019 t\u00eb vepr\u00ebs s\u00eb filozofit amerikan Robert Brandom, \u201cThe Spirit of Trust<\/em>\u201d. Vepra e Brandom \u00ebsht\u00eb nj\u00eb rilexim p\u00ebr situat\u00ebn aktuale bot\u00ebrore i vepr\u00ebs emblematike \u201cFenomenologjia e Frym\u00ebs\u201d nga filozofi klasik gjerman G. W. F Hegel. Brandom b\u00ebn pjes\u00eb n\u00eb nj\u00eb linj\u00eb interpretuesish bashk\u00ebkohor t\u00eb Hegelit, t\u00eb njohur si Shkolla e Pitsburgut, e cila tenton ta integroj\u00eb Hegelin brenda nj\u00eb bot\u00ebkuptimi liberal dhe ta rikuperoj\u00eb at\u00eb nga nj\u00eb trash\u00ebgimi interpretimesh radikalisht t\u00eb majta e t\u00eb djathta p\u00ebrgjat\u00eb shek. XX. Nj\u00eb autor tjet\u00ebr pjes\u00eb e k\u00ebsaj linje \u00ebsht\u00eb Robert Pippin, nj\u00eb tekst t\u00eb tijin rilexues<\/a><\/span><\/em><\/strong> t\u00eb nj\u00eb vepre tjet\u00ebr t\u00eb Hegelit e kemi botuar m\u00eb par\u00eb te nyje.al. Slavoj Zizek nga ana tjet\u00ebr b\u00ebn pjes\u00eb te ata hegelian\u00eb bashk\u00ebkohore t\u00eb cil\u00ebt e cil\u00ebsojn\u00eb hap falls leximin e tij liberal duke pohuar se filozofi gjerman mund t\u00eb interpretohet si\u00e7 duhet dhe na ndihmon n\u00eb leximin e gjendjes aktuale bot\u00ebrore nga nj\u00eb k\u00ebnd m\u00eb subversiv. Ky debat mes k\u00ebtyre dy autor\u00ebve p\u00ebrb\u00ebn nj\u00eb nga debatet m\u00eb t\u00eb r\u00ebnd\u00ebsishme t\u00eb filozofis\u00eb n\u00eb dit\u00ebt e sotme dhe p\u00ebr k\u00ebt\u00eb arsye kemi vendosur ta botojm\u00eb n\u00eb mediumin ton\u00eb. Mendojm\u00eb se ky tekst e reflekton m\u00eb s\u00eb miri k\u00ebt\u00eb debat brenda filozofis\u00eb mbi fatin e bot\u00ebs.<\/span><\/p>

\"Fotografi<\/span> Fotografi nga Macie Jones<\/em><\/span><\/p>

Pjesa I<\/strong><\/span><\/p>

Sllavoj Zhizhek<\/strong> thot\u00eb se nuk ka nevoj\u00eb q\u00eb Hegeli t\u00eb jet\u00eb profet q\u00eb t\u00eb na udh\u00ebzoj\u00eb p\u00ebr nj\u00eb t\u00eb nes\u00ebrme m\u00eb t\u00eb mir\u00eb.<\/em><\/span>
Teza q\u00eb dua t\u00eb mbroj \u00ebsht\u00eb se Hegeli \u00ebsht\u00eb filozofi m\u00eb i hapur kudrejt s\u00eb ardhmes pik\u00ebrisht pse ai shprehimisht ndalon \u00e7do projekt p\u00ebr se si duhet t\u00eb duket e ardhmja. Si\u00e7 thot\u00eb andej nga fundi i Hyrjes s\u00eb Filozofis\u00eb s\u00eb t\u00eb drejt\u00ebs<\/em> (1820), filozofia mundet vet\u00ebm t\u00eb pikturoj\u00eb \u201cgri mbi gri\u201d dhe \u201chuti i Minerv\u00ebs ia nis fluturimit vet\u00ebm me r\u00ebnien e muzgut\u201d. Pra, filozofia p\u00ebrkthen vet\u00ebm n\u00eb retrospekt, n\u00eb nj\u00eb skem\u00eb konceptuale \u201cgri\u201d (t\u00eb pajet\u00eb), nj\u00eb form\u00eb jete e cila sakaq ka mb\u00ebrritur pikun dhe ka hyr\u00eb n\u00eb r\u00ebnien e vet \u2013 q\u00eb po b\u00ebhet vet\u00eb \u201cgri\u201d. P\u00ebr ta th\u00ebn\u00eb thjesht e brutalisht, kjo \u00ebsht\u00eb arsyeja pse duhet t\u2019i refuzojm\u00eb t\u00eb gjith\u00eb ato lexime t\u00eb Hegelit t\u00eb cilat shohin n\u00eb mendimin e tij nj\u00eb model t\u00eb n\u00ebnkuptuar t\u00eb nj\u00eb shoq\u00ebrie t\u00eb ardhshme t\u00eb pajtuar me veten, q\u00eb l\u00eb pas t\u00ebhuaj\u00ebsimet e modernitetit. Un\u00eb i quaj k\u00ebta lexues \u201cende-jo-hegelian\u00eb\u201d.<\/span>
Filozofi amerikan Robert Brandom me kryevepr\u00ebn e tij m\u00eb t\u00eb fundit, The Spirit of Trust<\/em> (2019), ndoshta e tregoi veten si nj\u00eb prej \u201cende-jo-hegelian\u00ebve\u201d m\u00eb t\u00eb shquar. Sipas tij, Hegeli p\u00ebrvijon nj\u00eb ideal t\u00eb cilin ende nuk e kemi mb\u00ebrritur:<\/span><\/p>

\u201cM\u00ebsimi kryesor pozitiv e praktik prej analiz\u00ebs s\u00eb Hegelit mbi natyr\u00ebn e modernitetit, fryti i t\u00eb kuptuarit t\u00eb tij t\u00eb Ngjarjes s\u00eb Madhe n\u00eb historin\u00eb e njeriut, \u00ebsht\u00eb se n\u00ebse i p\u00ebrtypim si\u00e7 duhet arritjet dhe lajthitjet e modernitetit, ne mund t\u00eb ngrejm\u00eb mbi to institucione, praktika dhe vete t\u00eb reja t\u00eb vet\u00ebdijshme e m\u00eb t\u00eb mira \u2013 t\u00eb atilla q\u00eb t\u00eb jen\u00eb normativisht t\u00eb ep\u00ebrme sepse trup\u00ebzojn\u00eb nj\u00eb vet\u00ebnd\u00ebrgjegje m\u00eb t\u00eb madhe, nj\u00eb rrokje m\u00eb t\u00eb thell\u00eb t\u00eb llojit t\u00eb qenies q\u00eb jemi.\u201d (f. 456)<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>

N\u00eb k\u00ebto linja, Brandom propozon tre stade historike t\u00eb zhvillimit etik. N\u00eb Stadin e Par\u00eb \u2013 shoq\u00ebrit\u00eb tradicionale<\/em> \u2013 kemi Sittlichkeit<\/em> (nj\u00eb term hegelian me dometh\u00ebnien e nj\u00eb rendi zakonor moral t\u00eb pranuar si fakt natyror). N\u00eb Stadin e Dyt\u00eb, kemi t\u00ebhuaj\u00ebsimin<\/em>: subjektiviteti modern p\u00ebrfton lirin\u00eb e vet, por t\u00ebhuaj\u00ebsohet prej themel\u00ebve etik\u00eb t\u00eb shoq\u00ebris\u00eb. N\u00eb fund, n\u00eb Stadin e Tret\u00eb, i cili me sa duket \u00ebsht\u00eb n\u00eb horizont, kemi nj\u00eb form\u00eb t\u00eb re Sittlichkeit<\/em>-i, i p\u00ebrputhsh\u00ebm me subjektivitetin e lir\u00eb:<\/span><\/p>

\u201cTeksa shkruan Fenomenologjin\u00eb<\/em>, Hegeli e sheh Geist<\/em>-in (frym\u00ebn bot\u00ebrore) q\u00eb fillon t\u00eb konsolidoj\u00eb vetveten n\u00eb Stadin e Dyt\u00eb. Libri synon t\u00eb b\u00ebj\u00eb t\u00eb mundur p\u00ebr lexuesit form\u00ebn post-moderne t\u00eb vet\u00ebnd\u00ebrgjegjes q\u00eb Hegeli e quan \u201ct\u00eb diturit absolut\u201d dhe k\u00ebsisoj t\u00eb paralajm\u00ebroj\u00eb ardhjen e Stadit t\u00eb Tret\u00eb. Forma e re e vet\u00ebnd\u00ebrgjegjes shprehimisht filozofike \u00ebsht\u00eb ve\u00e7se fillesa e procesit, sepse praktika e institucione t\u00eb reja po ashtu do t\u00eb nevojiten p\u00ebr t\u00eb tejkaluar t\u00ebhuaj\u00ebsimin strukturor t\u00eb jet\u00ebs moderne\u201d. (f. 458)<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>

V\u00ebrtet? At\u00ebher\u00eb \u00e7\u2019t\u00eb themi p\u00ebr k\u00ebmb\u00ebnguljen e Hegelit q\u00eb filozofia mundet t\u00eb pikturoj\u00eb vet\u00ebm \u201cgri mbi gri\u201d, meq\u00eb, ashtu si huti i Minerv\u00ebs, ia nis fluturimit vet\u00ebm n\u00eb muzg \u2013 q\u00eb do t\u00eb thot\u00eb se ajo mundet ta kuptoj\u00eb historin\u00eb vet\u00ebm pasi<\/em> t\u00eb ket\u00eb ndodhur? K\u00ebtu Brandomi flet jo si Hegeli por si Marksi: t\u00eb diturit absolut \u00ebsht\u00eb p\u00ebr t\u00eb si k\u00ebnga e gjelit francez n\u00eb agun e ri (si\u00e7 shkroi Marksi p\u00ebr mendimin revolucionar). K\u00ebshtu paralajm\u00ebrohet nj\u00eb epok\u00eb e re shoq\u00ebrore kur \u201cpraktika e institucione t\u00eb reja po ashtu do t\u00eb nevojiten p\u00ebr t\u00eb tejkaluar t\u00ebhuaj\u00ebsimin strukturor t\u00eb jet\u00ebs moderne.\u201d<\/span><\/p>

Tre stadet e Brandomit p\u00ebrftohen p\u00ebrgjat\u00eb dy boshtesh: Sittlichkeit<\/em> ose jo Sittlichkeit<\/em>; dhe subjektivitet modern t\u00eb lir\u00eb ose jo subjektivitet. K\u00ebshtu kemi shoq\u00ebrin\u00eb tradicionale (Sittlichkeit<\/em> pa subjektivitet t\u00eb lir\u00eb), shoq\u00ebrin\u00eb moderne (subjektivitet t\u00eb lir\u00eb pa Sittlichkeit<\/em>) dhe shoq\u00ebrin\u00eb postmoderne q\u00eb po vjen (Sittlichkeit<\/em> me subjektivitet t\u00eb lir\u00eb). Brandom menj\u00ebher\u00eb ngre pyetjen mbi statusin e mund\u00ebsis\u00eb s\u00eb kat\u00ebrt q\u00eb nuk p\u00ebrshtatet me asnj\u00ebrin prej tre stadeve: situat\u00ebn as me Sittlichkeit<\/em> e as me subjektivitet t\u00eb lir\u00eb. Ai pyet, \u201c\u00c7far\u00eb shkon keq me iden\u00eb e t\u00ebhuaj\u00ebsimit paramodern?\u201d (f. 458).<\/span><\/p>

Fyerje dhe falje<\/strong><\/span>
Brandom e sheh \u00e7el\u00ebsin e Stadit t\u00eb Tret\u00eb t\u00eb shoq\u00ebris\u00eb \u2013 subjektivitet i lir\u00eb i integruar me moralitet \u2013 n\u00eb nocionin e \u201crikujtimit fal\u00ebs\u201d t\u00eb shtruar nga Hegeli drejt fundit t\u00eb kapitullit mbi Frym\u00ebn n\u00eb Fenomenologjin\u00eb e frym\u00ebs<\/em> (1807). Hendeku q\u00eb t\u00ebhuaj\u00ebson subjektin veprues nga \u201cgjykat\u00ebsi i sert\u00eb\u201d tejkalohet p\u00ebrmes pajtimit, q\u00eb kryhet jo vet\u00ebm nga agjenti q\u00eb rr\u00ebfen m\u00ebkatin e tij, por nga gjykat\u00ebsi q\u00eb po ashtu rr\u00ebfen pjes\u00ebmarrjen e tij n\u00eb at\u00eb \u00e7ka d\u00ebnon, meqen\u00ebse, si\u00e7 thot\u00eb Hegeli, \u201cE liga \u00ebsht\u00eb po ashtu v\u00ebshtrimi q\u00eb sheh t\u00eb lig\u00ebn kudo p\u00ebrreth vetes.\u201d<\/span><\/p>

Nocioni i Brandomit i rikujtimit fal\u00ebs \u00ebsht\u00eb i dobish\u00ebm sidomos sot. Na mund\u00ebson t\u00eb shohim \u00e7far\u00eb \u00ebsht\u00eb e rrem\u00eb te disa prej atyre q\u00eb mbrojn\u00eb \u201ctoleranc\u00ebn\u201d dhe refuzojn\u00eb \u201cgjuh\u00ebn e urrejtjes\u201d. A nuk \u00ebsht\u00eb nj\u00eb person politikisht korrekt, q\u00eb d\u00ebnon rrept\u00ebsisht ata q\u00eb akuzohen se praktikojn\u00eb \u201cgjuh\u00eb t\u00eb urrejtjes\u201d, nj\u00eb rast shembullor bashk\u00ebkoh\u00ebs i nj\u00eb gjykimi t\u00eb ngurt\u00eb moral? T\u00eb gjith\u00eb e dim\u00eb se sa t\u00eb befta dhe mizore mund t\u00eb jen\u00eb gjykime t\u00eb tilla \u2013 nj\u00eb fjal\u00eb gabim, nj\u00eb shaka q\u00eb konsiderohet e pap\u00ebrshtatshme dhe karriera jote mund t\u00eb rr\u00ebnohet. A ju kujtohet \u00e7\u2019i ndodhi\u00a0 koh\u00ebt e fundit kritikut t\u00eb filmit David Edelstein? Edelstein b\u00ebri nj\u00eb shaka goxha t\u00eb pashije n\u00eb faqen e tij private t\u00eb Facebook-ut n\u00eb lidhje me vdekjen e regjizorit t\u00eb Last Tango in Paris<\/em>, Bernardo Bertolucci, t\u00eb shoq\u00ebruar me nj\u00eb pamje t\u00eb ndalur nga skena e famshme e filmit, me Maria Schneider-in dhe Marlon Brandon-in. Ai e fshihu shpejt at\u00eb \u2013 p\u00ebrpara se t\u00eb plaste zallamahia publike, jo n\u00eb reagim ndaj k\u00ebsaj zallamahie! Por aktorja Martha Plimpton p\u00ebrnj\u00ebher\u00eb i cic\u00ebroi ndjek\u00ebsve t\u00eb saj, \u201cPushojeni [nga puna] at\u00eb. Menj\u00ebher\u00eb!\u201d \u2013 gj\u00eb q\u00eb ndodhi t\u00eb nes\u00ebrmen: Fresh Air dhe NPR nxorr\u00ebn njoftim se do nd\u00ebrprisnin lidhjet me Edelstein-in sepse postimi i tij kishte qen\u00eb \u201cfyes dhe i papranuesh\u00ebm, sidomos kur marrim parasysh p\u00ebrvoj\u00ebn e Maria Schneider-it gjat\u00eb xhirimit t\u00eb Last Tango in Paris<\/em>.\u201d<\/span><\/p>

Pra, cilat jan\u00eb implikimet e (ose, m\u00eb mir\u00eb, rregullat e path\u00ebna p\u00ebr t\u2019u kuptuar prej) k\u00ebtij incidenti? Laura Kipnis v\u00ebren, s\u00eb pari, \u201cnuk ka asgj\u00eb padashje te fyerjet padashje\u201d (The Guardian<\/em> 22\/12\/18). Me fjal\u00eb t\u00eb tjera, gj\u00ebra t\u00eb tilla nuk mund t\u00eb justifikohen si gabime t\u00eb \u00e7astit; n\u00eb vend t\u00eb k\u00ebsaj, ato duhet t\u00eb trajtohen si zbulim i karakterit t\u00eb v\u00ebrtet\u00eb t\u00eb fyesit. Kjo \u00ebsht\u00eb arsyeja pse qoft\u00eb edhe vet\u00ebm nj\u00eb fyerje e till\u00eb \u00ebsht\u00eb njoll\u00eb e pashqitshme kund\u00ebr teje, sado i penduar t\u00eb mund t\u00eb jesh: \u201cNj\u00eb shkelje dhe u dogje. Nj\u00eb postim pamend n\u00eb media sociale ka m\u00eb shum\u00eb r\u00ebnd\u00ebsi se 16-vjet pun\u00eb e ndershme.\u201d E vetmja gj\u00eb q\u00eb ndoshta<\/em> ndihmon \u00ebsht\u00eb nj\u00eb proces i gjat\u00eb vet\u00ebkritik dhe vet\u00ebshqyrtues: \u201cT\u00eb mos e qortosh vazhdimisht k\u00ebt\u00eb p\u00ebrmas\u00eb t\u00eb b\u00ebn bashk\u00ebpun\u00ebtor n\u00eb krime kund\u00ebr grave.\u201d T\u00eb duhet ta d\u00ebshmosh pambarimisht meqen\u00ebse, si burr\u00eb, a priori<\/em> nuk t\u00eb zihet bes\u00eb (\u201c\u00e7far\u00eb s\u2019t\u00eb thon\u00eb burrat [p\u00ebr t\u00eb shp\u00ebtuar nga situata]!\u201d).<\/span><\/p>

\u00c7far\u00eb kuptimi do t\u00eb kishte \u201cfalja rikujtuese\u201d k\u00ebtu? Akuzuesit do t\u00eb duhej jo vet\u00ebm ta falin fyesin p\u00ebr aktin e \u201cgjuh\u00ebs s\u00eb urrejtjes\u201d p\u00ebr t\u00eb cilin qe p\u00ebrgjegj\u00ebs; ata<\/em> duhet po ashtu t\u00eb rr\u00ebfehen dhe t\u00eb heqin dor\u00eb nga urrejtja e tyre. Dhe \u00ebsht\u00eb leht\u00ebsisht e v\u00ebrejtshme se ka nj\u00eb urrejte t\u00eb madhe n\u00eb k\u00ebrkesa t\u00eb tilla t\u00eb paepura e politikisht korrekte p\u00ebr nd\u00ebshkim t\u00eb beft\u00eb \u2013 n\u00eb k\u00ebt\u00eb rast, me siguri m\u00eb shum\u00eb urrejtje se n\u00eb vet\u00eb aktin q\u00eb d\u00ebnohet. Nj\u00eb perifrazim i th\u00ebnies s\u00eb Hegelit rreth s\u00eb Lig\u00ebs parshtatet shk\u00eblqyesh\u00ebm k\u00ebtu: \u201cUrrejtja banon n\u00eb v\u00ebshtrimin q\u00eb e sheh urrejtjen githandej\u201d.<\/span><\/p>

Nj\u00eb pjes\u00eb e mir\u00eb e gjuh\u00ebs s\u00eb urrejtjes padyshim shp\u00ebrfaq arroganc\u00eb patronizuese, ironi brutale e k\u00ebshtu me radh\u00eb, dhe vet\u00ebm rall\u00ebher\u00eb urrejtje t\u00eb kulluar<\/em>. \u00cbsht\u00eb pik\u00ebrisht n\u00eb k\u00ebt\u00eb p\u00ebrmas\u00eb q\u00eb d\u00ebnimi i korrektes\u00ebs politike keqpercepton vetveten si ushtruese t\u00eb mir\u00ebbazuar t\u00eb drejt\u00ebsis\u00eb. D\u00ebnime t\u00eb tilla nuk \u00e7ajn\u00eb kok\u00eb t\u00eb rind\u00ebrtojn\u00eb arsyetimin q\u00eb e udh\u00ebzoi fyesin. Edelstein, p\u00ebr shembull, ndoshta e shihte postimin e tij n\u00eb Facebook si shfaqje humori pa shije por prap\u00eb jo fyese. Kjo do t\u00eb thot\u00eb se kemi nj\u00eb dualitet: si qen\u00eb gj\u00ebrat p\u00ebr nd\u00ebrgjegjen e fyesit dhe si qen\u00eb ato \u201cn\u00eb vetvete\u201d \u2013 \u00e7ka do t\u00eb thot\u00eb, n\u00eb syt\u00eb e gjykat\u00ebsit ose t\u00eb personit t\u00eb fyer. I nj\u00ebjti hendek vlen p\u00ebr vet\u00eb d\u00ebnimin e gjykat\u00ebsit politikisht korrekt, megjith\u00ebse k\u00ebtu hendeku \u00ebsht\u00eb midis asaj se si q\u00ebndrojn\u00eb gj\u00ebrat p\u00ebr nd\u00ebrgjegjen e saj<\/em> (\u201cUn\u00eb thjesht po jap nj\u00eb gjykim t\u00eb drejt\u00eb\u201d) dhe si jan\u00eb ato \u201cn\u00eb vetvete\u201d (nj\u00eb shp\u00ebrfaqje e urrejtjes me synim shkat\u00ebrrimin e jet\u00ebs ose karrier\u00ebs s\u00eb fyesit).<\/span><\/p>

Le t\u00eb marrim nj\u00eb shembull tjet\u00ebr. N\u00eb dhjetor t\u00eb 2016-s, kur mori vesh vdekjen e papritur t\u00eb Carrie Fisher, Steve Martin cic\u00ebroi: \u201cKur isha i ri, Carrie Fisher qe krijesa m\u00eb e bukur q\u00eb kisha par\u00eb ndonj\u00ebher\u00eb. Ajo doli t\u00eb ishte e zgjuar dhe e mpreht\u00eb gjithashtu.\u201d Menj\u00ebher\u00eb plas\u00ebn polemikat qortuese. Martini u akuzua se po \u201cobjektivizonte\u201d Fisher-in, se po fokusohej n\u00eb fizikun e saj n\u00eb vend se n\u00eb talentet ose ndikimin e saj \u2013 nj\u00eb p\u00ebrdorues i Twitter-it u p\u00ebrgjigj: \u201cMendoj se ajo [duhet t\u00eb] \u00e7mohet pse ishte di\u00e7ka m\u00eb e lart\u00eb se thjesht simpatike. Si d\u00ebshrion t\u00eb mbahesh mend?\u201d K\u00ebshtu Martini e fshiu cic\u00ebrim\u00ebn e tij… Por arysetimi i Martinit mund t\u00eb rind\u00ebrtohet leht\u00eb k\u00ebtu: ai deshte t\u00eb tregonte respektin e tij p\u00ebr Fisherin p\u00ebrtej bukuris\u00eb s\u00eb saj: ai e lokalizon mahnitjen e tij me bukurin\u00eb e Fisherit n\u00eb takimet e para, pastaj menj\u00ebher\u00eb kalon n\u00eb \u201ce zgjuar dhe e mpreht\u00eb\u201d \u2013 e gjith\u00eb ideja<\/em> e cic\u00ebrim\u00ebs s\u00eb tij qe se ajo ishte m\u00eb shum\u00eb se thjesht e bukur. Nj\u00eb q\u00ebndrim prej \u201cfaljeje rikujtuese\u201d do ta qortonte at\u00eb pse nuk mori parasysh efektin e cic\u00ebrim\u00ebs s\u00eb tij, por prap\u00eb do ta falte, duke k\u00ebrkuar prej tij vet\u00ebm q\u00eb ai t\u00eb \u201cp\u00ebrnalt\u00ebsoj\u00eb\u201d1<\/sup> (nj\u00eb term hegelian, aufheben<\/em> n\u00eb gjermanisht) homazhet e tij kundrejt Fisherit duke e formuluar at\u00eb si\u00e7 duhet. Asgj\u00eb e k\u00ebtij lloji nuk ngjet n\u00eb ato d\u00ebnime t\u00eb rr\u00ebmbyeshme q\u00eb, n\u00eb cic\u00ebrim\u00ebn e tij, shohin vet\u00ebm nj\u00eb objektifikim shovinist mashkullor t\u00eb grave.<\/span><\/p>

Limitet e faljes<\/strong><\/span>
Nocioni i faljes rikujtimore ka gjithsesi limite t\u00eb qarta. P\u00ebr me qen\u00eb edhe nj\u00ebher\u00eb brutalisht i drejtp\u00ebrdrejt\u00eb: a mundemi t\u00eb \u201cfalim rikujtimisht\u201d Hitlerin? Dhe n\u00ebse p\u00ebrgjigjja \u00ebsht\u00eb jo, a \u00ebsht\u00eb kjo p\u00ebr shkak se Hitleri nuk mund t\u00eb falet, apo ngase vet\u00eb ne nuk jemi ende n\u00eb nj\u00eb nivel mjaftuesh\u00ebm t\u00eb lart\u00eb t\u00eb reflektimit etik p\u00ebr ta b\u00ebr\u00eb k\u00ebt\u00eb? E vetmja m\u00ebnyr\u00eb p\u00ebr ta b\u00ebr\u00eb k\u00ebt\u00eb, q\u00eb shmang prapavajtjen n\u00eb pozicionin e \u201cshpirtit t\u00eb bukur\u201d2<\/sup> i cili jep gjykime nga nj\u00eb pozit\u00eb t\u00eb ve\u00e7uar \u00e7interesimi, \u00ebsht\u00eb t\u00eb p\u00ebrqafojm\u00eb mund\u00ebsin\u00eb e dyt\u00eb \u2013 se d\u00ebnimi yn\u00eb i ashp\u00ebr p\u00ebr Hitlerin si lig\u00ebsi duhet t\u00eb jet\u00eb p\u00ebrcaktim reflektues3<\/sup> i s\u00eb lig\u00ebs q\u00eb mbijeton te vet\u00eb ne \u2013 pra [t\u00eb p\u00ebrqafojm\u00eb tez\u00ebn q\u00eb d\u00ebfton] gjendjen \u00a0jo-reflektuese t\u00eb pozicionit nga ku japim gjykime.<\/span><\/p>

Le t\u00eb mos harrojm\u00eb se shum\u00eb revizionist\u00eb t\u00eb s\u00eb djatht\u00ebs s\u00eb skajshme sot p\u00ebrpiqen seriozisht t\u00eb aktualizojn\u00eb nj\u00eb falje rikujtuese t\u00eb Hitlerit. Po, thon\u00eb ata, Hitleri b\u00ebri gabime t\u00eb tmerrshme; kreu krime t\u00eb lebetitshme; por k\u00ebto ai i b\u00ebri tek e fundit thjesht pse po luftonte p\u00ebr kauz\u00ebn e mir\u00eb (kund\u00ebr korrupsionit kapitalist t\u00eb trup\u00ebzuar te \u00e7ifut\u00ebt), edhe pse n\u00eb nj\u00eb m\u00ebnyr\u00eb t\u00eb gabuar. Revizionist\u00ebt po ashtu rreken t\u00eb drejtpeshojn\u00eb p\u00ebrgjegj\u00ebsin\u00eb n\u00eb nj\u00eb m\u00ebnyr\u00eb gjoja hegeliane: a nuk pasqyroheshin krimet e Hitlerit n\u00eb nj\u00ebanshm\u00ebrin\u00eb e pozicionit \u00e7ifut \u2013 q\u00ebndrimi i tyre ekskluziv, pagatishm\u00ebria e tyre p\u00ebr t\u2019u integruar n\u00eb kombin gjerman? Sidoqoft\u00eb, \u00ebsht\u00eb kollaj t\u00eb nd\u00ebrtohet nj\u00eb variant m\u00eb racional, jo-revizionisto-djathtist, se si edhe ne q\u00eb e d\u00ebnojm\u00eb nazizmin duhet t\u00eb k\u00ebrkojm\u00eb falje p\u00ebr lig\u00ebsin\u00eb q\u00eb ka vet\u00eb k\u00ebndv\u00ebshtrimi yn\u00eb. P\u00ebr shembull, n\u00eb k\u00ebto linja: \u201cjo vet\u00ebm q\u00eb anti-semitizmi nuk kufizohej ve\u00e7se n\u00eb Gjermani, ai qe shum\u00eb i fort\u00eb edhe n\u00eb kombe t\u00eb cilat ishin n\u00eb luft\u00eb me Gjermanin\u00eb, p\u00ebrfshi tonin\u201d; ose, \u201cpadrejt\u00ebsia e dukshme e Traktatit t\u00eb Versaj\u00ebs \u2013 nj\u00eb akt hakmarr\u00ebs kundrejt gjerman\u00ebve t\u00eb mposhtur n\u00eb Luft\u00ebn e Par\u00eb Bot\u00ebrore \u2013 kontribuoi n\u00eb ardhjen e nazist\u00ebve n\u00eb pushtet\u201d; ose, n\u00eb nj\u00eb nivel m\u00eb t\u00eb p\u00ebrgjithsh\u00ebm, \u201cfashizmi lindi prej dinamikave dhe antagonizmave t\u00eb kapitalizmit per\u00ebndimor\u201d. Nd\u00ebrkoh\u00eb q\u00eb duhet t\u00eb refuzojm\u00eb t\u00ebr\u00ebsisht k\u00ebt\u00eb linj\u00eb arsyetimi, p\u00ebrfundimisht nuk \u00ebsht\u00eb zgjidhje t\u00eb vihet nj\u00eb vij\u00eb ndar\u00ebse nd\u00ebrmjet m\u00ebkateve q\u00eb mund t\u00eb falen n\u00eb rikujtim dhe atyre t\u00eb tjerave q\u00eb jan\u00eb tep\u00ebr t\u00eb m\u00ebdha p\u00ebr t\u2019u falur. Nj\u00eb procedur\u00eb e till\u00eb paraqet nj\u00eb dualitet t\u00ebr\u00ebsisht n\u00eb mosp\u00ebrputhje me qasjen e Hegelit. Ajo \u00e7ka duhet t\u00eb b\u00ebjm\u00eb n\u00eb vend t\u00eb k\u00ebsaj \u00ebsht\u00eb t\u00eb ndryshojm\u00eb vet\u00eb nocionin e faljes rikujtuese: t\u2019i heqim k\u00ebtij nocioni \u00e7do jehon\u00eb t\u00eb \u201ctani je i falur, tani nuk je m\u00eb v\u00ebrtet i keq\u201d.<\/span>
Brandom, sigurisht, e ngre k\u00ebt\u00eb problem:<\/span><\/p>

\u201cDisa nga gj\u00ebrat q\u00eb njer\u00ebzit kan\u00eb b\u00ebr\u00eb na duken sikur, edhe pas nj\u00eb reflektimi t\u00eb nevojsh\u00ebm, jan\u00eb thjesht t\u00eb pafalshme. N\u00eb k\u00ebto raste, megjith\u00ebse mund t\u00eb p\u00ebrpiqemi t\u00eb zbusim pasojat e keqb\u00ebrjeve, ne nuk ia kemi fare iden\u00eb si t\u2019ia b\u00ebjm\u00eb p\u00ebr t\u00eb shquar daljen e ndonj\u00eb norme qeveris\u00ebse q\u00eb vet\u00eb ne do mund ta p\u00ebrqafonim\u201d (f. 716).<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>

P\u00ebrgjigjja e menj\u00ebhershme e tij ndaj k\u00ebsaj \u00ebsht\u00eb:<\/span><\/p>

\u201cPor tani duhet t\u00eb shtrojm\u00eb pyetjen: I kujt \u00ebsht\u00eb faji q\u00eb [keq]b\u00ebrja, ose ndonj\u00eb aspekt i saj, \u00ebsht\u00eb e pafalshme \u2013 e b\u00ebr\u00ebsit apo fal\u00ebsit? A \u00ebsht\u00eb d\u00ebshtim i agjentit t\u00eb keq apo i rikujtuesit t\u00eb keq? A \u00ebsht\u00eb kjo \u2013 i kujt \u00ebsht\u00eb faji \u2013 thjesht \u00e7\u00ebshtje e se si jan\u00eb gj\u00ebrat? Apo pasqyron t\u00eb pakt\u00ebn pjes\u00ebrisht d\u00ebshtimin e rikujtuesit p\u00ebr t\u00eb sajuar nj\u00eb rr\u00ebfenj\u00eb q\u00eb i p\u00ebrgjigjet m\u00eb shum\u00eb norm\u00ebs?\u201d<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>

Mir\u00ebpo, s\u00ebrish, n\u00eb rastin e holokaustit a duhet<\/em> ne \u201ct\u00eb pakt\u00ebn t\u00eb pranojm\u00eb p\u00ebrgjegj\u00ebsi t\u00eb barabart\u00eb n\u00eb aspektin e fal\u00ebsit t\u00eb pasuksessh\u00ebm\u201d (f. 717)? Dhe a duhet ne po ashtu t\u00eb pretendojm\u00eb, bashk\u00eb me Brandomin, se \u201cduhet t\u00eb kemi besim q\u00eb ky d\u00ebshtim rikujtues-njoh\u00ebs, po ashtu \u2013 si d\u00ebshtimi i keqb\u00ebr\u00ebsit origjinal t\u00eb falur jo tamam \u2013 do t\u00eb gjej\u00eb falje me m\u00eb shum\u00eb sukses nga vler\u00ebsues t\u00eb ardhsh\u00ebm (t\u00eb cil\u00ebt din\u00eb m\u00eb shum\u00eb dhe jan\u00eb m\u00eb t\u00eb mir\u00eb n\u00eb k\u00ebt\u00eb pun\u00eb)\u201d (f. 718)? P\u00ebr m\u00eb tep\u00ebr, po p\u00ebr rastet \u2013 e gjymtimit t\u00eb gjenitaleve fem\u00ebrore, ose t\u00eb tortur\u00ebs, ose t\u00eb skllav\u00ebris\u00eb, q\u00eb ne sot i p\u00ebrjetojm\u00eb si tmerre, por \u2013 p\u00ebr t\u00eb cilat \u00ebsht\u00eb e leht\u00eb t\u00eb rind\u00ebrtosh mendimin q\u00eb i b\u00ebn k\u00ebto gj\u00ebra t\u00eb pranueshme jo vet\u00ebm kundrejt atyre q\u00eb i kryejn\u00eb ato, por disa her\u00eb edhe ndaj viktimave t\u00eb tyre? Dhe \u00e7\u2019t\u00eb themi p\u00ebr ato raste ku pik\u00ebpamja prapavepruese i b\u00ebn veprimet m\u00eb shum\u00eb<\/em> t\u00eb papranueshme sesa ishin n\u00eb rrethanat origjinale? N\u00ebse i gjykojm\u00eb me rrept\u00ebsi raste t\u00eb tilla, ne jo vet\u00ebm q\u00eb ngrejm\u00eb norma t\u00eb reja dhe i imponojm\u00eb k\u00ebto mbi akte t\u00eb shkuara, [por] ne zbulojm\u00eb n\u00eb nj\u00ebfar\u00eb kuptimi edhe se akte t\u00eb tilla qen\u00eb gjithmon\u00eb<\/em> t\u00eb papranueshme, edhe n\u00ebse ato dukeshin<\/em> t\u00eb pranueshme p\u00ebr vepruesit. Skllav\u00ebria \u00ebsht\u00eb nj\u00eb shembull i qart\u00eb i k\u00ebsaj.<\/span><\/p>

Le t\u00eb marrim s\u00ebrish shembullin e Hitlerit dhe holokaustit. M\u00ebnyra p\u00ebr t\u2019u marr\u00eb me t\u00eb ndoshta d\u00ebftohet nga rr\u00ebfimi biblik i profetit Habakuk, [nga] shprehja m\u00eb pikante e \u00e7far\u00eb do mund t\u00eb quhej \u201cheshtja e zotave\u201d \u2013 ajo ndaj pyetjes s\u00eb madhe q\u00eb i adresohet Zotit nga Jobi: \u201cKu ishe ti kur ai tmerr i caktuar ndodhi? P\u00ebrse mbete i heshtur, p\u00ebrse nuk nd\u00ebrhyre?\u201d N\u00eb vijim jan\u00eb fjal\u00ebt e ankes\u00ebs s\u00eb Habakukut:<\/span><\/p>

\u201cDeri kur, o Zot, do t\u00eb b\u00ebrtas dhe ti nuk do t\u00eb m\u00eb d\u00ebgjosh? Un\u00eb k\u00eblthas: “Dhun\u00eb!”, por ti nuk jep shp\u00ebtim. P\u00ebrse m\u00eb b\u00ebn t\u00eb shikoj paudh\u00ebsin\u00eb dhe m\u00eb b\u00ebn t\u00eb shoh \u00e7oroditjen? P\u00ebrpara meje q\u00ebndron grabitja dhe dhuna, ka grindje dhe p\u00ebr\u00e7arja po shtohet. Prandaj ligji nuk ka forc\u00eb dhe drejt\u00ebsia nuk ia del t\u00eb fitoj\u00eb, sepse i pabesi e mashtron t\u00eb drejtin dhe drejt\u00ebsia shtremb\u00ebrohet.\u201d (Habakuku<\/em>, Kapitulli 1)<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>

Si p\u00ebrgjigjet Zoti? P\u00ebrgjigjja duhet lexuar me shum\u00eb kujdes: \u201cShikoni midis kombeve dhe k\u00ebqyrni, do t\u00eb mbeteni t\u00eb habitur dhe t\u00eb shastisur, sepse un\u00eb do t\u00eb kryej n\u00eb dit\u00ebt tuaja nj\u00eb vep\u00ebr, q\u00eb ju nuk do ta besonit edhe sikur t’jua tregonin.\u201d Ky nuk \u00ebsht\u00eb fare justifikim i thjesht\u00eb \u201cteleologjik\u201d n\u00eb stilin e \u201cKi durim; udh\u00ebt e Per\u00ebndis\u00eb jan\u00eb t\u00eb \u00e7uditshme; vuajtja jote i sh\u00ebrben nj\u00eb q\u00ebllimi n\u00eb planin e madh hyjnor q\u00eb nuk mund ta rrok\u00ebsh nga pik\u00ebv\u00ebshtrimi yt i kufizuar dhe i fund\u00ebm\u201d. V\u00ebrtet, prej nj\u00eb pik\u00ebpamjeje t\u00eb krishter\u00eb, t\u00eb thuash se holokausti (ose vuajtje t\u00eb ngjashme) i sh\u00ebrben ndonj\u00eb q\u00ebllimi m\u00eb t\u00eb lart\u00eb p\u00ebr t\u00eb cilin nuk jemi n\u00eb dijeni, \u00ebsht\u00eb nj\u00eb ndyt\u00ebsi anti-kristiane, meqen\u00ebse ideja e dhembshuris\u00eb s\u00eb Krishtit \u00ebsht\u00eb solidariteti i pakusht\u00ebzuar me ata q\u00eb vuajn\u00eb. N\u00eb vend t\u00eb k\u00ebsaj, p\u00ebr t\u00eb p\u00ebrdorur shprehjen e Giorgio Agambenit, k\u00ebtu na duhet t\u00eb mbledhim \u201cguximin e pashpres\u00eb\u201d. Pra, \u00e7far\u00eb do t\u00eb thot\u00eb q\u00eb ne do \u201chabitemi dhe shastisemi\u201d dhe se di\u00e7ka do t\u00eb ndodh\u00eb q\u00eb nuk do ta besonim as po t\u00eb na e kishin treguar? Me gjas\u00eb gj\u00ebja m\u00eb e pabesueshme \u00ebsht\u00eb kthimi i \u00e7ifut\u00ebve n\u00eb Tok\u00ebn e Premtuar, gj\u00eb q\u00eb, hamend\u00ebsisht, nuk do t\u00eb kishte ndodhur pa holokaustin. At\u00ebher\u00eb Hitleri, vet\u00ebm p\u00ebr aq sa i takon ekzistenc\u00ebs s\u00eb Izraelit q\u00eb u krijua nga krimet e tij, ndoshta do t\u00eb mund t\u00eb falej prapaveprimthi. Mir\u00ebpo, s\u00ebrish, duhet t\u00eb jemi shum\u00eb t\u00eb p\u00ebrpikt\u00eb k\u00ebtu: kjo n\u00eb asnj\u00eb m\u00ebnyr\u00eb nuk e justifikon holokaustin si \u201csakrifica q\u00eb populli \u00e7ifut kishte nevoj\u00eb t\u00eb paguante p\u00ebr kthimin n\u00eb tok\u00ebn e tyre\u201d (teza e disa anti-semit\u00ebve); e as nuk \u00ebsht\u00eb pretendim q\u00eb holokausti qe pjes\u00eb e nj\u00eb plani sekret hyjnor p\u00ebr t\u00eb mund\u00ebsuar kthimin e \u00e7ifut\u00ebve n\u00eb m\u00ebm\u00ebdheun e tyre (teza e disa anti-semit\u00ebve t\u00eb tjer\u00eb). Thjesht do t\u00eb thot\u00eb se themelimi i Izraelit qe pasoj\u00eb e papritur, e paplanifikuar e holokaustit. E as nuk thot\u00eb gj\u00eb rreth padrejt\u00ebsive t\u00eb tjera q\u00eb rezultuan prej k\u00ebtij grupi veprimesh. P\u00ebr shembull, toka tek e cila \u00e7ifut\u00ebt u kthyen \u00ebsht\u00eb banuar prej shum\u00eb koh\u00ebsh nga njer\u00ebz t\u00eb tjer\u00eb k\u00ebshtuq\u00eb nuk mund t\u00eb p\u00ebrshenjohet kaq kollaj si \u201ce tyrja\u201d.<\/span><\/p>

Kurthi kryesor q\u00eb duhet shmangur k\u00ebtu \u00ebsht\u00eb teleologjia holistike; ideja se di\u00e7ka q\u00eb na shfaqet si tmerr mundet, prej nj\u00eb k\u00ebndv\u00ebshtrimi m\u00eb t\u00eb gjer\u00eb, t\u00eb jet\u00eb element q\u00eb kontribuon n\u00eb harmonin\u00eb globale, n\u00eb t\u00eb nj\u00ebjt\u00ebn m\u00ebnyr\u00eb q\u00eb nj\u00eb njoll\u00eb n\u00eb nj\u00eb piktur\u00eb t\u00eb madhe kontribuon n\u00eb bukurin\u00eb e saj n\u00ebse e shohim piktur\u00ebn nga nj\u00eb larg\u00ebsi e posa\u00e7me. Trash\u00ebgimia e Jobit, i cili nuk mori prej Zotit shpjegim p\u00ebr vuajtjen e tij, nuk na lejon t\u00eb strehohemi n\u00eb standardin e ides\u00eb s\u00eb nj\u00eb Zoti transhendent si Mjesht\u00ebr i fsheht\u00eb i cili e di kuptimin e asaj q\u00eb na shfaqet neve si katastrof\u00eb e pakuptim \u2013 Zoti i cili sheh t\u00eb t\u00ebr\u00eb pamjen e piktur\u00ebs, ku ajo q\u00eb neve na duket si njoll\u00eb kontribuon n\u00eb harmonin\u00eb globale. Kur ballafaqohemi me nj\u00eb ngjarje si holokausti, ose si vdekja e milion\u00ebve n\u00eb Kongo, a nuk \u00ebsht\u00eb e pahijshme t\u00eb pretendosh se k\u00ebto njolla kontribuojn\u00eb n\u00eb harmonin\u00eb e s\u00eb T\u00ebr\u00ebs? A mundet<\/em> t\u00eb ekzistoj\u00eb nj\u00eb e T\u00ebr\u00eb q\u00eb t\u00eb p\u00ebrligj\u00eb dhe k\u00ebshtu t\u00eb shlyej\u00eb nj\u00eb ngjarje t\u00eb till\u00eb si holokakusti? Vdekja e Krishtit n\u00eb kryq do t\u00eb thot\u00eb n\u00eb fakt se duhet l\u00ebn\u00eb pa droj\u00eb nocioni i Zotit si kujdestar transhendent i cili garanton rezultatin e lumtur t\u00eb veprave tona \u2013 garancin\u00eb e teleologjis\u00eb holistike. Vdekja n\u00eb kryq e Krishtit \u00ebsht\u00eb vdekja<\/em> e atij Zoti. Madje ajo p\u00ebrs\u00ebrit p\u00ebrfundimin e Jobit, duke refuzuar \u00e7far\u00ebdo \u201ckuptimi m\u00eb t\u00eb thell\u00eb\u201d q\u00eb turbullon pamjen e realitetit brutal t\u00eb katastrofave. Madje edhe nj\u00eb variant i fort\u00eb i k\u00ebsaj logjike \u2013 pra ideja se falja nuk n\u00ebnkupton fshirjen e p\u00ebrmbajtjes s\u00eb ve\u00e7ant\u00eb, por njohjen e faktit se kjo p\u00ebrmbajtje e ve\u00e7ant\u00eb \u00ebsht\u00eb e domosdoshme p\u00ebr aktualizimin e s\u00eb mir\u00ebs universale \u2013 nuk \u00ebsht\u00eb mjaftuesh\u00ebm i fort\u00eb.<\/span><\/p>

P\u00ebr t\u00eb lexuar pjes\u00ebn e dyt\u00eb kliko k\u00ebtu<\/a>.\u00a0<\/em><\/span><\/strong><\/span>
____________<\/span>
[1]<\/a> Shpirti i bukur<\/em> \u00ebsht\u00eb nocion q\u00eb Hegeli p\u00ebrdor te Fenomenologjia<\/em> dhe ilustron m\u00ebnyr\u00ebn si subjekti ankohet p\u00ebr dhe mohon, nuk njeh p\u00ebrgjegj\u00ebsin\u00eb e tij n\u00eb lidhje me at\u00eb \u00e7ka ndodh p\u00ebrreth tij. [Sh\u00ebnim i p\u00ebrkth.]<\/span>
[2]<\/a> P\u00ebrcaktimi reflektues<\/em>, term i Zhizhekut q\u00eb vjen prej nocionit teknik hegelian, i zhvilluar n\u00eb Doktrin\u00ebn e thelbit<\/em> t\u00eb Shkenc\u00ebs s\u00eb logjik\u00ebs,<\/em> q\u00eb p\u00ebrshenjon l\u00ebvizjen medoemos ridyfishuese t\u00eb reflektimit<\/em>. Ky term \u00ebsht\u00eb i treti n\u00eb triad\u00ebn hegeliane t\u00eb nocionit t\u00eb reflektimit (reflektimi shtrues, i jasht\u00ebm dhe p\u00ebrcaktues). [Sh\u00ebnim i p\u00ebrkth.]<\/span>
[3]<\/a> P<\/em>\u00ebrnalt\u00ebsim<\/em> \u00ebsht\u00eb p\u00ebrkthim i propozuar nga Hysamedin Feraj i termit hegelian. Ai fjal\u00ebp\u00ebrfjalsh\u00ebm n\u00eb gjermanisht do t\u00eb thot\u00eb anulim dhe riorganizim, por jo aq shum\u00eb ngritje apo lart\u00ebsim si\u00e7 sugjeron termi n\u00eb shqip. Pra ai ka kuptimin e nj\u00eb mohimi ose eleminimi t\u00eb di\u00e7kaje n\u00eb nj\u00eb proces por duke e ruajtur at\u00eb si element t\u00eb pjessh\u00ebm n\u00eb shtjellimin e m\u00ebtejsh\u00ebm t\u00eb procesit. Si i till\u00eb, ai luan rol ky\u00e7 n\u00eb dialektik\u00ebn hegeliane. [Sh\u00ebnim i p\u00ebrkth.]<\/span><\/p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

P\u00ebrkthim| Genc Shehu| 29.01.2021| nyje.al\u00a0 Teksti i m\u00ebposht\u00ebm \u00ebsht\u00eb marr\u00eb nga philosophynow.org shkruar nga Slavoj Zizek si recens\u00eb e botimit t\u00eb vitit 2019 t\u00eb vepr\u00ebs s\u00eb filozofit amerikan Robert Brandom, \u201cThe Spirit of Trust\u201d. Vepra e Brandom \u00ebsht\u00eb nj\u00eb rilexim p\u00ebr situat\u00ebn aktuale bot\u00ebrore i vepr\u00ebs emblematike \u201cFenomenologjia e Frym\u00ebs\u201d nga filozofi klasik gjerman G. W. F Hegel. Brandom b\u00ebn pjes\u00eb n\u00eb nj\u00eb linj\u00eb interpretuesish bashk\u00ebkohor t\u00eb Hegelit, t\u00eb njohur si Shkolla e Pitsburgut, e cila tenton ta integroj\u00eb Hegelin brenda nj\u00eb bot\u00ebkuptimi liberal dhe ta rikuperoj\u00eb at\u00eb nga nj\u00eb trash\u00ebgimi interpretimesh radikalisht t\u00eb majta e t\u00eb djathta p\u00ebrgjat\u00eb shek. XX. Nj\u00eb autor tjet\u00ebr pjes\u00eb e k\u00ebsaj linje \u00ebsht\u00eb Robert Pippin, nj\u00eb tekst t\u00eb tijin rilexues t\u00eb nj\u00eb vepre tjet\u00ebr t\u00eb Hegelit e kemi botuar m\u00eb par\u00eb te nyje.al. Slavoj Zizek nga ana tjet\u00ebr b\u00ebn pjes\u00eb te ata hegelian\u00eb bashk\u00ebkohore t\u00eb cil\u00ebt e cil\u00ebsojn\u00eb hap falls leximin e tij liberal duke pohuar se filozofi gjerman mund t\u00eb interpretohet si\u00e7 duhet dhe na ndihmon n\u00eb leximin e gjendjes aktuale bot\u00ebrore nga nj\u00eb k\u00ebnd m\u00eb subversiv. Ky debat mes k\u00ebtyre dy autor\u00ebve p\u00ebrb\u00ebn nj\u00eb nga debatet m\u00eb t\u00eb r\u00ebnd\u00ebsishme t\u00eb filozofis\u00eb n\u00eb dit\u00ebt e sotme dhe p\u00ebr k\u00ebt\u00eb arsye kemi vendosur ta botojm\u00eb n\u00eb mediumin ton\u00eb. Mendojm\u00eb se ky tekst e reflekton m\u00eb s\u00eb miri k\u00ebt\u00eb debat brenda filozofis\u00eb mbi fatin e bot\u00ebs. Fotografi nga Macie Jones Pjesa I Sllavoj Zhizhek thot\u00eb se nuk ka nevoj\u00eb q\u00eb Hegeli t\u00eb jet\u00eb profet q\u00eb t\u00eb na udh\u00ebzoj\u00eb p\u00ebr nj\u00eb t\u00eb nes\u00ebrme m\u00eb t\u00eb mir\u00eb.Teza q\u00eb dua t\u00eb mbroj \u00ebsht\u00eb se Hegeli \u00ebsht\u00eb filozofi m\u00eb i hapur kudrejt s\u00eb ardhmes pik\u00ebrisht pse ai shprehimisht ndalon \u00e7do projekt p\u00ebr se si duhet t\u00eb duket e ardhmja. Si\u00e7 thot\u00eb andej nga fundi i Hyrjes s\u00eb Filozofis\u00eb s\u00eb t\u00eb drejt\u00ebs (1820), filozofia mundet vet\u00ebm t\u00eb pikturoj\u00eb \u201cgri mbi gri\u201d dhe \u201chuti i Minerv\u00ebs ia nis fluturimit vet\u00ebm me r\u00ebnien e muzgut\u201d. Pra, filozofia p\u00ebrkthen vet\u00ebm n\u00eb retrospekt, n\u00eb nj\u00eb skem\u00eb konceptuale \u201cgri\u201d (t\u00eb pajet\u00eb), nj\u00eb form\u00eb jete e cila sakaq ka mb\u00ebrritur pikun dhe ka hyr\u00eb n\u00eb r\u00ebnien e vet \u2013 q\u00eb po b\u00ebhet vet\u00eb \u201cgri\u201d. P\u00ebr ta th\u00ebn\u00eb thjesht e brutalisht, kjo \u00ebsht\u00eb arsyeja pse duhet t\u2019i refuzojm\u00eb t\u00eb gjith\u00eb ato lexime t\u00eb Hegelit t\u00eb cilat shohin n\u00eb mendimin e tij nj\u00eb model t\u00eb n\u00ebnkuptuar t\u00eb nj\u00eb shoq\u00ebrie t\u00eb ardhshme t\u00eb pajtuar me veten, q\u00eb l\u00eb pas t\u00ebhuaj\u00ebsimet e modernitetit. Un\u00eb i quaj k\u00ebta lexues \u201cende-jo-hegelian\u00eb\u201d.Filozofi amerikan Robert Brandom me kryevepr\u00ebn e tij m\u00eb t\u00eb fundit, The Spirit of Trust (2019), ndoshta e tregoi veten si nj\u00eb prej \u201cende-jo-hegelian\u00ebve\u201d m\u00eb t\u00eb shquar. Sipas tij, Hegeli p\u00ebrvijon nj\u00eb ideal t\u00eb cilin ende nuk e kemi mb\u00ebrritur: \u201cM\u00ebsimi kryesor pozitiv e praktik prej analiz\u00ebs s\u00eb Hegelit mbi natyr\u00ebn e modernitetit, fryti i t\u00eb kuptuarit t\u00eb tij t\u00eb Ngjarjes s\u00eb Madhe n\u00eb historin\u00eb e njeriut, \u00ebsht\u00eb se n\u00ebse i p\u00ebrtypim si\u00e7 duhet arritjet dhe lajthitjet e modernitetit, ne mund t\u00eb ngrejm\u00eb mbi to institucione, praktika dhe vete t\u00eb reja t\u00eb vet\u00ebdijshme e m\u00eb t\u00eb mira \u2013 t\u00eb atilla q\u00eb t\u00eb jen\u00eb normativisht t\u00eb ep\u00ebrme sepse trup\u00ebzojn\u00eb nj\u00eb vet\u00ebnd\u00ebrgjegje m\u00eb t\u00eb madhe, nj\u00eb rrokje m\u00eb t\u00eb thell\u00eb t\u00eb llojit t\u00eb qenies q\u00eb jemi.\u201d (f. 456) N\u00eb k\u00ebto linja, Brandom propozon tre stade historike t\u00eb zhvillimit etik. N\u00eb Stadin e Par\u00eb \u2013 shoq\u00ebrit\u00eb tradicionale \u2013 kemi Sittlichkeit (nj\u00eb term hegelian me dometh\u00ebnien e nj\u00eb rendi zakonor moral t\u00eb pranuar si fakt natyror). N\u00eb Stadin e Dyt\u00eb, kemi t\u00ebhuaj\u00ebsimin: subjektiviteti modern p\u00ebrfton lirin\u00eb e vet, por t\u00ebhuaj\u00ebsohet prej themel\u00ebve etik\u00eb t\u00eb shoq\u00ebris\u00eb. N\u00eb fund, n\u00eb Stadin e Tret\u00eb, i cili me sa duket \u00ebsht\u00eb n\u00eb horizont, kemi nj\u00eb form\u00eb t\u00eb re Sittlichkeit-i, i p\u00ebrputhsh\u00ebm me subjektivitetin e lir\u00eb: \u201cTeksa shkruan Fenomenologjin\u00eb, Hegeli e sheh Geist-in (frym\u00ebn bot\u00ebrore) q\u00eb fillon t\u00eb konsolidoj\u00eb vetveten n\u00eb Stadin e Dyt\u00eb. Libri synon t\u00eb b\u00ebj\u00eb t\u00eb mundur p\u00ebr lexuesit form\u00ebn post-moderne t\u00eb vet\u00ebnd\u00ebrgjegjes q\u00eb Hegeli e quan \u201ct\u00eb diturit absolut\u201d dhe k\u00ebsisoj t\u00eb paralajm\u00ebroj\u00eb ardhjen e Stadit t\u00eb Tret\u00eb. Forma e re e vet\u00ebnd\u00ebrgjegjes shprehimisht filozofike \u00ebsht\u00eb ve\u00e7se fillesa e procesit, sepse praktika e institucione t\u00eb reja po ashtu do t\u00eb nevojiten p\u00ebr t\u00eb tejkaluar t\u00ebhuaj\u00ebsimin strukturor t\u00eb jet\u00ebs moderne\u201d. (f. 458) V\u00ebrtet? At\u00ebher\u00eb \u00e7\u2019t\u00eb themi p\u00ebr k\u00ebmb\u00ebnguljen e Hegelit q\u00eb filozofia mundet t\u00eb pikturoj\u00eb vet\u00ebm \u201cgri mbi gri\u201d, meq\u00eb, ashtu si huti i Minerv\u00ebs, ia nis fluturimit vet\u00ebm n\u00eb muzg \u2013 q\u00eb do t\u00eb thot\u00eb se ajo mundet ta kuptoj\u00eb historin\u00eb vet\u00ebm pasi t\u00eb ket\u00eb ndodhur? K\u00ebtu Brandomi flet jo si Hegeli por si Marksi: t\u00eb diturit absolut \u00ebsht\u00eb p\u00ebr t\u00eb si k\u00ebnga e gjelit francez n\u00eb agun e ri (si\u00e7 shkroi Marksi p\u00ebr mendimin revolucionar). K\u00ebshtu paralajm\u00ebrohet nj\u00eb epok\u00eb e re shoq\u00ebrore kur \u201cpraktika e institucione t\u00eb reja po ashtu do t\u00eb nevojiten p\u00ebr t\u00eb tejkaluar t\u00ebhuaj\u00ebsimin strukturor t\u00eb jet\u00ebs moderne.\u201d Tre stadet e Brandomit p\u00ebrftohen p\u00ebrgjat\u00eb dy boshtesh: Sittlichkeit ose jo Sittlichkeit; dhe subjektivitet modern t\u00eb lir\u00eb ose jo subjektivitet. K\u00ebshtu kemi shoq\u00ebrin\u00eb tradicionale (Sittlichkeit pa subjektivitet t\u00eb lir\u00eb), shoq\u00ebrin\u00eb moderne (subjektivitet t\u00eb lir\u00eb pa Sittlichkeit) dhe shoq\u00ebrin\u00eb postmoderne q\u00eb po vjen (Sittlichkeit me subjektivitet t\u00eb lir\u00eb). Brandom menj\u00ebher\u00eb ngre pyetjen mbi statusin e mund\u00ebsis\u00eb s\u00eb kat\u00ebrt q\u00eb nuk p\u00ebrshtatet me asnj\u00ebrin prej tre stadeve: situat\u00ebn as me Sittlichkeit e as me subjektivitet t\u00eb lir\u00eb. Ai pyet, \u201c\u00c7far\u00eb shkon keq me iden\u00eb e t\u00ebhuaj\u00ebsimit paramodern?\u201d (f. 458). Fyerje dhe faljeBrandom e sheh \u00e7el\u00ebsin e Stadit t\u00eb Tret\u00eb t\u00eb shoq\u00ebris\u00eb \u2013 subjektivitet i lir\u00eb i integruar me moralitet \u2013 n\u00eb nocionin e \u201crikujtimit fal\u00ebs\u201d t\u00eb shtruar nga Hegeli drejt fundit t\u00eb kapitullit mbi Frym\u00ebn n\u00eb Fenomenologjin\u00eb e frym\u00ebs (1807). Hendeku q\u00eb t\u00ebhuaj\u00ebson subjektin veprues nga \u201cgjykat\u00ebsi i sert\u00eb\u201d tejkalohet p\u00ebrmes pajtimit, q\u00eb kryhet jo vet\u00ebm nga agjenti q\u00eb rr\u00ebfen m\u00ebkatin e tij, por nga gjykat\u00ebsi q\u00eb po ashtu rr\u00ebfen pjes\u00ebmarrjen e tij n\u00eb at\u00eb \u00e7ka d\u00ebnon, meqen\u00ebse, si\u00e7 thot\u00eb Hegeli, \u201cE liga \u00ebsht\u00eb po ashtu v\u00ebshtrimi q\u00eb sheh t\u00eb lig\u00ebn kudo p\u00ebrreth vetes.\u201d Nocioni i Brandomit i rikujtimit fal\u00ebs \u00ebsht\u00eb i dobish\u00ebm sidomos sot. Na mund\u00ebson t\u00eb shohim \u00e7far\u00eb \u00ebsht\u00eb e rrem\u00eb te disa prej atyre q\u00eb mbrojn\u00eb \u201ctoleranc\u00ebn\u201d dhe refuzojn\u00eb \u201cgjuh\u00ebn e urrejtjes\u201d. A<\/p>","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":8088,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"episode_type":"","audio_file":"","podmotor_file_id":"","podmotor_episode_id":"","cover_image":"","cover_image_id":"","duration":"","filesize":"","filesize_raw":"","date_recorded":"","explicit":"","block":"","ocean_post_layout":"right-sidebar","ocean_both_sidebars_style":"","ocean_both_sidebars_content_width":0,"ocean_both_sidebars_sidebars_width":0,"ocean_sidebar":"ocs-kulture-category-post-sidebar","ocean_second_sidebar":"0","ocean_disable_margins":"enable","ocean_add_body_class":"","ocean_shortcode_before_top_bar":"","ocean_shortcode_after_top_bar":"","ocean_shortcode_before_header":"","ocean_shortcode_after_header":"","ocean_has_shortcode":"","ocean_shortcode_after_title":"","ocean_shortcode_before_footer_widgets":"","ocean_shortcode_after_footer_widgets":"","ocean_shortcode_before_footer_bottom":"","ocean_shortcode_after_footer_bottom":"","ocean_display_top_bar":"default","ocean_display_header":"default","ocean_header_style":"","ocean_center_header_left_menu":"0","ocean_custom_header_template":"0","ocean_custom_logo":0,"ocean_custom_retina_logo":0,"ocean_custom_logo_max_width":0,"ocean_custom_logo_tablet_max_width":0,"ocean_custom_logo_mobile_max_width":0,"ocean_custom_logo_max_height":0,"ocean_custom_logo_tablet_max_height":0,"ocean_custom_logo_mobile_max_height":0,"ocean_header_custom_menu":"0","ocean_menu_typo_font_family":"0","ocean_menu_typo_font_subset":"","ocean_menu_typo_font_size":0,"ocean_menu_typo_font_size_tablet":0,"ocean_menu_typo_font_size_mobile":0,"ocean_menu_typo_font_size_unit":"px","ocean_menu_typo_font_weight":"","ocean_menu_typo_font_weight_tablet":"","ocean_menu_typo_font_weight_mobile":"","ocean_menu_typo_transform":"","ocean_menu_typo_transform_tablet":"","ocean_menu_typo_transform_mobile":"","ocean_menu_typo_line_height":0,"ocean_menu_typo_line_height_tablet":0,"ocean_menu_typo_line_height_mobile":0,"ocean_menu_typo_line_height_unit":"","ocean_menu_typo_spacing":0,"ocean_menu_typo_spacing_tablet":0,"ocean_menu_typo_spacing_mobile":0,"ocean_menu_typo_spacing_unit":"","ocean_menu_link_color":"","ocean_menu_link_color_hover":"","ocean_menu_link_color_active":"","ocean_menu_link_background":"","ocean_menu_link_hover_background":"","ocean_menu_link_active_background":"","ocean_menu_social_links_bg":"","ocean_menu_social_hover_links_bg":"","ocean_menu_social_links_color":"","ocean_menu_social_hover_links_color":"","ocean_disable_title":"default","ocean_disable_heading":"default","ocean_post_title":"","ocean_post_subheading":"","ocean_post_title_style":"","ocean_post_title_background_color":"","ocean_post_title_background":0,"ocean_post_title_bg_image_position":"","ocean_post_title_bg_image_attachment":"","ocean_post_title_bg_image_repeat":"","ocean_post_title_bg_image_size":"","ocean_post_title_height":0,"ocean_post_title_bg_overlay":0.5,"ocean_post_title_bg_overlay_color":"","ocean_disable_breadcrumbs":"default","ocean_breadcrumbs_color":"","ocean_breadcrumbs_separator_color":"","ocean_breadcrumbs_links_color":"","ocean_breadcrumbs_links_hover_color":"","ocean_display_footer_widgets":"default","ocean_display_footer_bottom":"default","ocean_custom_footer_template":"0","ocean_post_oembed":"","ocean_post_self_hosted_media":"","ocean_post_video_embed":"","ocean_link_format":"","ocean_link_format_target":"self","ocean_quote_format":"","ocean_quote_format_link":"post","ocean_gallery_link_images":"off","ocean_gallery_id":[],"footnotes":""},"categories":[5,4,829],"tags":[94,100,123,124,135,237,305,320],"class_list":["post-8084","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-kulture","category-kryenyje","category-perkthime","tag-falja","tag-filozofi","tag-hegel","tag-hegelian","tag-jobi","tag-perkthim","tag-sllavoj-zhizhek","tag-transhendence","entry","has-media"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/nyje.al\/sq\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8084","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/nyje.al\/sq\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/nyje.al\/sq\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/nyje.al\/sq\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/nyje.al\/sq\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=8084"}],"version-history":[{"count":5,"href":"https:\/\/nyje.al\/sq\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8084\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":25558,"href":"https:\/\/nyje.al\/sq\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8084\/revisions\/25558"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/nyje.al\/sq\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/8088"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/nyje.al\/sq\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=8084"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/nyje.al\/sq\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=8084"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/nyje.al\/sq\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=8084"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}