Representação em Rousseau e Hannah Arendt Representation in Rousseau and Hannah Arendt

O artigo tem como objetivo comparar as concepções de representação formuladas por Rousseau e Hannah Arendt. Sempre considerados como críticos da representação política, cada um dos autores faz sua crítica baseada em argumentos bastante distintos. Esses argumentos serão comparados, seguindo a trilha dos conceitos de natureza, artifício, vontade, unidade e pluralidade.<br>The aim of the article is to compare the concepts of representation formulated by Hannah Arendt and Rousseau. Although both authors are considered critics of political representation, each one does her/his criticism focused on very different arguments. Those arguments will be compared, following the path trailed by the concepts of nature, artifice, will, unity and plurality

A invenção do Emílio como conjectura: opção metodológica da escrita de Rousseau The invention of the Émile as conjecture: methodological choice of Rousseau's writing

O presente trabalho tem por propósito refletir sobre o pensamento pedagógico de Rousseau. Para isso, a análise centra-se na leitura da obra Emílio ou da educação publicada em 1762. O texto procura cotejar a leitura do Emílio com a análise de comentadores, de modo a proceder à revisão bibliográfica sobre o tema. A hipótese aqui defendida é a de que Emílio não é apenas um livro sobre educação. Rousseau enfatiza, no texto, sua preocupação quanto ao estabelecimento da caracterização do "ser" da criança. Nesse sentido, ele queria procurar, na infância de maneira geral, vestígios do homem em estado de natureza. Ao fazer isso, estabelece uma periodização da vida e do aprendizado. Denunciando o descaso de sua época relativamente à figura da criança, crítico do modelo educacional veiculado pelos colégios religiosos de seu tempo, Rousseau descreve a condição da criança, ao mesmo tempo em que inventa um menino imaginário, que deveria ser educado de acordo com os critérios da natureza. A educação do menino Emílio pode ser compreendida como um libelo contra o severo tratamento oferecido às crianças de verdade - tanto nas famílias quanto nos colégios. Segundo o filósofo, não se era capaz de "ver" a criança. Sendo assim, a escrita Emílio não tem a finalidade de estabelecer prescrições pedagógicas, pois Rousseau cria o menino apartado da sociedade. O objetivo ali era outro: o autor pretendia identificar na criança sua essência. A figura do Emílio era, assim, um método para operar o pensamento.<br>The present work aims at a reflection on Rousseau's pedagogical thinking. To such end, the analysis is centered on the reading of his Émile: or treatise on education published in 1762. The article seeks to contrast the Émile with the analyses of commentators, so as to proceed to a literature review on the subject. The hypothesis put forward here is that the Émile is more than just a book about education. Rousseau emphasizes in his text his concern with establishing a characterization of the child's "being". In this sense he was trying to find in childhood in general vestiges of the man in a state of Nature. In so doing, he establishes a periodization of life and of learning. Denouncing the neglect displayed by his epoch with regard to the child, and critical of the educational model propagated by the religious schools of that time, Rousseau describes the condition of the child, whilst inventing an imaginary boy that was supposed to be educated according to Nature's criteria. Émile's education can be understood as a libel against the harshness of the treatment dispensed to real children - both inside their families and at school. According to the philosopher people were incapable of "seeing" the child. Therefore, the writing of the Émile does not intend to establish pedagogical prescriptions, since Rousseau has the boy educated away from society. The objective here is a different one: the author wanted to identify in the child his essence. The figure of Émile is, thus, a method to operate the thought

Ticagrelor in patients with diabetes and stable coronary artery disease with a history of previous percutaneous coronary intervention (THEMIS-PCI) : a phase 3, placebo-controlled, randomised trial

Background: Patients with stable coronary artery disease and diabetes with previous percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), particularly those with previous stenting, are at high risk of ischaemic events. These patients are generally treated with aspirin. In this trial, we aimed to investigate if these patients would benefit from treatment with aspirin plus ticagrelor. Methods: The Effect of Ticagrelor on Health Outcomes in diabEtes Mellitus patients Intervention Study (THEMIS) was a phase 3 randomised, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial, done in 1315 sites in 42 countries. Patients were eligible if 50 years or older, with type 2 diabetes, receiving anti-hyperglycaemic drugs for at least 6 months, with stable coronary artery disease, and one of three other mutually non-exclusive criteria: a history of previous PCI or of coronary artery bypass grafting, or documentation of angiographic stenosis of 50% or more in at least one coronary artery. Eligible patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to either ticagrelor or placebo, by use of an interactive voice-response or web-response system. The THEMIS-PCI trial comprised a prespecified subgroup of patients with previous PCI. The primary efficacy outcome was a composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke (measured in the intention-to-treat population). Findings: Between Feb 17, 2014, and May 24, 2016, 11 154 patients (58% of the overall THEMIS trial) with a history of previous PCI were enrolled in the THEMIS-PCI trial. Median follow-up was 3·3 years (IQR 2·8–3·8). In the previous PCI group, fewer patients receiving ticagrelor had a primary efficacy outcome event than in the placebo group (404 [7·3%] of 5558 vs 480 [8·6%] of 5596; HR 0·85 [95% CI 0·74–0·97], p=0·013). The same effect was not observed in patients without PCI (p=0·76, p interaction=0·16). The proportion of patients with cardiovascular death was similar in both treatment groups (174 [3·1%] with ticagrelor vs 183 (3·3%) with placebo; HR 0·96 [95% CI 0·78–1·18], p=0·68), as well as all-cause death (282 [5·1%] vs 323 [5·8%]; 0·88 [0·75–1·03], p=0·11). TIMI major bleeding occurred in 111 (2·0%) of 5536 patients receiving ticagrelor and 62 (1·1%) of 5564 patients receiving placebo (HR 2·03 [95% CI 1·48–2·76], p<0·0001), and fatal bleeding in 6 (0·1%) of 5536 patients with ticagrelor and 6 (0·1%) of 5564 with placebo (1·13 [0·36–3·50], p=0·83). Intracranial haemorrhage occurred in 33 (0·6%) and 31 (0·6%) patients (1·21 [0·74–1·97], p=0·45). Ticagrelor improved net clinical benefit: 519/5558 (9·3%) versus 617/5596 (11·0%), HR=0·85, 95% CI 0·75–0·95, p=0·005, in contrast to patients without PCI where it did not, p interaction=0·012. Benefit was present irrespective of time from most recent PCI. Interpretation: In patients with diabetes, stable coronary artery disease, and previous PCI, ticagrelor added to aspirin reduced cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, and stroke, although with increased major bleeding. In that large, easily identified population, ticagrelor provided a favourable net clinical benefit (more than in patients without history of PCI). This effect shows that long-term therapy with ticagrelor in addition to aspirin should be considered in patients with diabetes and a history of PCI who have tolerated antiplatelet therapy, have high ischaemic risk, and low bleeding risk