A questão judaica: O pária como paradigma do agir e do pensar em Hannah Arendt

Abstract

Considering the Jewish issue as the search theme, we set out for a watch on the first works of Hannah Arendt, especially the Jewish Writings (1930-1960). In this task work, it interests us identify one reading key that we consider relevant and central to the thought understanding of the author, namely: the pariah manner of thinking and acting. Conscious that Hannah Arendt ‗s work is already read considering several other keys (for example: The aristotelic, the republican and the Kantian), it doesn‘t intend to deny the relevant of these interpretations, but propose that the pariah manner of acting and thinking immerge as significative interpretative key. In this context, it emerges with centrality all underlying discussionto the Jewish issue, especially of the antissemitism problem and of the assimilacionism as emergency contexts of this pariah manner of acting and thinking. Is this scent, it comes out with outstanding importance the difference between the parvenue of upstart attitude and the rebellious pariah of conscious attitude, that chooses for entering the public scene and for getting along with the world aiming liberty. In this sense, the pariah manner of thinking and acting doesn‘t succumb before the temptation of personal safeguard, but on the contrary, assumes a confronting and reconciliating outlook with the world. To our understanding, this pariah manner implies in such philosophize that it doesn‘t fit with the traditional political chains nor of the thinking, already consecrated by the western tradition. The pariah thinking manner, in this sense, aims the understanding. However, not only from the fright, the thaumazein, but especially, from the pain. The pariah manner of philosophizing considers other ways of events‘ confronting and the reflection upon these ones. Therefore, Hannah Arendt, relating to the traditional ways of thinking and acting, emerges as an outsider, however not fully, this because although she doesn‘t assume the traditional ways, she maintains with these ones a critical dialogue, as she was every moment, saying - I‘m not this, but this implied what I am. Thence her reverence critically dialogic with the western tradition, that even taking her in her way and, sometimes escaping from her canons, assumes her as paradigm. What leads us to the understanding that the pariah manner of acting and thinking has centrality in the thinking of the author and leads us to a critical watch upon the traditional manner of conceiving philosophy. The philosopher in this perspective isn‘t ever more the creator of conception, but a storyteller. He assumes the narrative as focus and the comprehension as perspective, since he occupies himself with the events and not with the contemplation of last conceptions, he becomes a world spectator.