Institucionalna promena i paradoks (restitucije i) restauracije institucije

My intention in this text is to present the most significant contribution of some French philosophers and anthropologists to the notion of reconstruction and advancement of institutions. The paradox of change, reform or transformation of the institution – is an entirely new institution possible? How do institutions die? – lies in the difficulty or even impossibility to change something that manifests what we are as a group. If institutions really present or represent the relations among all of us, how can they be changed in the first place? Whence the capacity for change? What allows for the idea of the “new”?U ovom tekstu mi je namera da pokazem najvažniji prilog nekih francuskih filozofa i antro-pologa u vezi sa rekonstrukcijom i poboljšanjem institucija. Paradoks promene, reforme ili transformacije institucije (da li je moguća potpuno nova institucija i kako umiru institucije?) zasniva se na teškoći ili nemogućnosti da se promeni nesto što manifestuje ono sto mi kao grupa jesmo. Ako institucije predstavljaju ili pokazuju zapravo relacije koje postoje između svih nas, kako je moguće menjati ih? Odakle kapacitet za promenu i kako je uopšte moguća ideja „novog“

To institute, to primally institute (Stiften, Urstiften): Husserl’s first readers and translators in France: A possible origin of continental philosophy

(nemački) In diesem Text wird die Bedeutung von Husserls phänomenologischen Forschungen zur (ursprünglichen) Institution und zur Institutionalisierung (neben den Verben "stiften" und "urstiften" verwendet Husserl die Nomen "Stiftung", "Urstiftung" und "Endstiftung"). Es wird angenommen, dass die Bedeutung dieser nicht ausreichend bekannten Strategien nur in den unveröffentlichten Handschriften gefunden werden kann, dass die unterschiedlichen Generationen der Konsultanten von Husserls Archiven (in Leuven und Paris) eine identische Überzeugung von der Bedeutung der Husserlschen Entdeckungen bezeugt, dass Merleau- Pontys Übersetzung von Stiftung als "institution" dominiert und dass eben diese Übersetzung bewirkt hat, dass Husserl zu einer französischen Angelegenheit wurde. Die Idee des Artikels ist, dass diese Theater der Lektüre, der Übersetzung und des Einflusses Husserls die kontinentale Philosophie begründet. Das bedeutet, dass Husserls Strategie der Stiftung/Urstiftung am Ursprung dieses Syntagmas liegen kann, da das Denken einer Institution der Philosophie als Denken Europas strukturiert ist, als Denken von Menschheit und als Denken der Begegnung mit dem Anderen (Intersubjektivität)

How to Design Housing for the Poor?

In the second half of the 19th century, poverty is above all an urban problem. How do the first modern urban planners imagine the struggle against poverty, and can ‘wealth be in the service of the workers and the people’? Primarily using two Reports, John Locke’s 1697 The Report on the Poor and A Philosophical Review of Poverty (Wolff, Lamb, Zur-Szpiro) from 2015, I intend to explain and determine relative and absolute poverty, ghetto, the dark ghetto (Shelby), the suburbs, slums, ‘worker cities’ (Cités Ouvrières), the ‘social palace’, etc

Is the Project (or Object) “nella testa dell’architetto?” Is There Anything “nella testa dell’architetto, soggetto, autore?”

Konferencija Project Concept Design The Innovation of the Architectural Project Politecnico di Torin

Institution, Community, politics: On Book 3 of Franz Rosenzweig’s Star of Redemption

Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois; Department of German & Department of Religious Studies and Jewish Studies Progra

Gilles Deleuze on Institution and Violence [Žil Delez o instituciji i nasilju]

Th e general idea of the article is to compare Deleuze’s theory of the institution, which emerges in the context of various infl uences of French phenomenology and philosophy of law, with Searle’s theory and the latest Anglo-Saxon theories of the institution, and the new institutionalism. Deleuze carelessly diff erentiates infl uences and fragments copied or taken over from Hume, Saint-Just, de Sade, Renard, Hauriou, Durkheim, Malinowski and others and in the end completely succeeds in relegating to oblivion his ingenious project from 1953, Instincts and Institutions (Instincts et institutions). Th e consequences of such writing and theoretical work call into question the status of the theory of the institution and replace it with intuition and recognition that the thematisation of the institution is an impossible task. Th us the author of the article attempts to ‘integrate’ this impossibility to systematically think or explain the fi gure of institution into the framework of the great and pioneering work of Saint- Just, Hume, Deleuze, Gehlen and Searle

Stvarna institucija. Dokument i realizam

Regardless of the fact that I am using certain texts by Searle, Fer- raris, Smith and De Soto, my intention is not at all to reiterate someone else’s position in my own words, nor is it to question or modify some such position. My intention for now is to, using Ferraris’ theory of the document, affirm the existence of a paradox - one rejected by Searle, but unconvincingly so, I think - regarding the institution (or the institutionalization of the institution). In order to do that, it seems to me that I am forced to slightly disturb both Searle’s and Ferraris’ conception, in attempting to offer my own contribution to a new future theory of the institution