In this essay the idea is put forward that rethinking doing is the task that human sciences will need to undertake in the twenty-first century because the dichotomy do/think is one of the most deceptive and dangerous ...In this essay the idea is put forward that rethinking doing is the task that human sciences will need to undertake in the twenty-first century because the dichotomy do/think is one of the most deceptive and dangerous that the Western furor dividendi has ever formulated. Likewise, this is the time to re-do thinking： Both activities, divided from each other, are today quantitatively efficient, but incapable of making sense of themselves, of their own proceeding and of the world where they operate. Similarly incapable are the people who perform them and suffer cruelly from this defeat. It would take a rehabilitated subject, restored to an active role as interpreter and creator of culture, to remedy these shortcomings, reintegrating the spheres in a tensile equilibrium rich in novelty and significance. To this end, in an interdisciplinary perspective, insights by Dumont, Simmel, and Damasio are discussed and connected to Sennett＇s crucial intuition of the need for a new craftsmanship. This becomes the model of a foundational cultural act, in which a complex vision of culture joins a subjectivity that is at the same time a dynamic balance between rational and emotional components and a process where body and soul are inextricably entwined.展开更多
文摘In this essay the idea is put forward that rethinking doing is the task that human sciences will need to undertake in the twenty-first century because the dichotomy do/think is one of the most deceptive and dangerous that the Western furor dividendi has ever formulated. Likewise, this is the time to re-do thinking： Both activities, divided from each other, are today quantitatively efficient, but incapable of making sense of themselves, of their own proceeding and of the world where they operate. Similarly incapable are the people who perform them and suffer cruelly from this defeat. It would take a rehabilitated subject, restored to an active role as interpreter and creator of culture, to remedy these shortcomings, reintegrating the spheres in a tensile equilibrium rich in novelty and significance. To this end, in an interdisciplinary perspective, insights by Dumont, Simmel, and Damasio are discussed and connected to Sennett＇s crucial intuition of the need for a new craftsmanship. This becomes the model of a foundational cultural act, in which a complex vision of culture joins a subjectivity that is at the same time a dynamic balance between rational and emotional components and a process where body and soul are inextricably entwined.
