Sobre a contradição em Arthur Giannotti: lógica e dialética no capitalismo contemporâneo

Abstract

This work is about the nature of contradiction in Arthur Giannotti in the context of logic and dialectics in contemporary capitalism based on his theoretical-philosophical analysis of Friedrich Hegel, Karl Marx and Ludwig Wittgenstein. Critical of the absolute principle of non-contradiction and apophantic predication, Giannotti also analyzes the limits of contradiction in the Hegelian conceptual substance. When looking for Marx's inversion and overcoming of Hegel, he finds solutions based on an interpretation of the notion of expanding expressiveness and the concept of language games from the second Wittgenstein. Contradictions in regulated, specific and expressive practices are in Giannottian interpretation those in which the indeterminacies of specific errors can alter the initial language game in its own exercise when a contradiction arises. If a rule is set for a game, and by following it we contradict ourselves, then it is there, by contradicting our own rule, that lies the problem and the philosophical activity of contradiction. It is a philosophical problem because the contradiction is linked to the conditions of a living language that can be verified in its arbitrary contexts. It considers the level of everyday life in which imperfections arise, which are not, therefore, from the world, but from the links that can transform signals, mere traces of language, into signs, that is, into rules of a language exercise. Contradiction exerts meaning in a world that is indifferent to the grammatical rules in language games, which may or may not follow the rule by taking bipolarity as a sign of the meaning of useful objects. It supports a “change in aspect” of the expression of a new perception accompanied by the expression of the unchanged perception. In criticizing capitalism, Giannotti distinguishes the specifically capitalist categories of its becoming, considering the becoming of logical situations instead of the vulgar empiricism of the scientific — therefore a philosopher, not a scientist. Its categories are based on practical logos, as a form of expression, which is the action itself and the possibility of its normative correction, both identitarian and contradictory. Its categories have in the practical logos, as a form of expression, the action itself and the possibility of its normative correction, both identitarian and contradictory. In these terms, the contradiction only occurs for Giannotti if there is fetishistic alienation, which steals the production of meaning from a necessary illusion. Fetishism appears from money (monopoly of the general equivalent), which reifies the meaning of individual work as a concrete case of a norm that appears as autonomous in the production and exchange of goods. It is the operation of the presupposition being replaced as a concrete fact, and the supposed being placed as an abstraction. Because of this, the philosopher describes the grammar of capital for contradiction, a way of living in which the capitalist rule sets its own case and effects its selfvalorization (capital valorization).