Reinhart Koselleck

Encountering the Past within the Present: Modern Experiences of Time examines different encounters with the past from within the present-whether as commemoration, nostalgia, silence, ghostly haunting or combinations thereof. Taking its cue from Hannah Arendt's definition of the present as a time span lying between past and future, the author reflects on the old philosophical question of how to live the good life-not only with others who are physically with us but also with those whose presence is ghostly and liminal. While tradition may no longer command the same authority as it did in antiquity or the middle ages, individuals are by no means severed from the past. Rather, nostalgic longing for bygone times and traumatic preoccupation with painful historical events demonstrate the vitality of the past within the present. Divided into three parts, chapters examine ways in which the legacies of World War II, the Holocaust and communism have been remembered after 1945 and 1989. Maintaining a sustained reflection on the nexus of memory, modernity and time in tandem with ancient questions of responsibility for one another and the world, the volume contributes to the growing field of memory studies from a philosophical perspective. As such, it will appeal to scholars of sociology, social theory and philosophy with interests in collective memory and heritage.

La India moderna, la mayor democracia del mundo, es una de las grandes desconocidas en el campo de la historia de las ideas en el mundo académico hispanohablante. Esta obra busca ayudar a reparar dicha laguna a través de un estudio del pensamiento de cuatro autores indios clave - Rabindranath Tagore, Mohandas K. Gandhi, Bhimarao Ambedkar y Jawaharlal Nehru - y su concepción de cuatro conceptos políticos fundamentales: la sociedad civil, el Estado, el nacionalismo y el comunalismo.

Haciendo uso de la metodología de la historia de los conceptos de Reinhart Koselleck, el libro busca analizar la transición a la modernidad del pensamiento político indio y cómo, dentro de ese proceso, los conceptos occidentales introducidos por el colonialismo británico son incorporados y reconceptualizados por la intelectualidad india, dando lugar a una modernidad política diferente.

Resumo: O presente artigo busca discutir as linguagens artísticas de Waldemar Cordeiro e Wesley Duke Lee em meio ao processo de metropolização e cosmopolitização da cidade de São Paulo entre a década de 1950 e 1964. Abordamos as obras dos dois artistas a partir do modo como ambos constituíram, estética e politicamente, temporalidades com base na modernidade paulistana. Para cumprir o escopo deste estudo, colocamos em discussão os debates artísticos da época, situando os dois intelectuais a partir de suas perspectivas sobre modernidade e visualidade: Cordeiro identificado ao concretismo e Duke Lee ao neodadaísmo e surrealismo. Por fim, apontamos as diferenças entre as propostas dos artistas em urdir temporalidades, acionando sensibilidades utópicas e modernizantes em Waldemar Cordeiro e nostálgicas e antimodernas em Wesley Duke Lee. Palavras-chave: Waldemar Cordeiro, Wesley Duke Lee, temporalidade. Abstract: This article seeks to discuss the artistic languages of Waldemar Cordeiro and Wesley Duke Lee in the midst of the metropolization and cosmopolitanization process of São Paulo city between the 1950s and 1964. We approach the works of the two artists from the way in which they both constituted, aesthetically and politically, temporalities from São Paulo's modernity. To fulfill the scope of this study, we put into discussion the artistic debates of the time, placing the two intellectuals from their perspectives on modernity and visuality: Cordeiro being identified with concretism and Duke Lee with neodadaism and surrealism. Finally, we point out the differences between the artists' proposals to weave temporalities, triggering utopian and modernizing sensibilities in Waldemar Cordeiro and nostalgic and antimodern ones in Wesley Duke Lee.

På spissen Denne boken kom ut første gang i 1962 i da forfatteren var 33 år gammel. Det dreier seg om en litt utvidet utgave av et såkalt habilitasjonsskriften postdoktoravhandling som normalt er nødvendig for å kunne bli professor i Tyskland. Skriftet vokste ut av et arbeid Habermas var med og skrev for det berømte Institut für Sozialforschung i Frankfurt, der lederne var Max Horkheimer og Theodor Adorno, også kjent som hovedpersoner i «Frankfurterskolen », som Habermas så skulle komme til å føre videre, på selvstendig grunnlag. Dette arbeidet, som fikk tittelen Student und Politik ii , var en undersøkelse omkring studenters politiske holdninger basert på intervjuer, og er det mest berømte sosiologiske arbeidet som er gjort på instituttet etter at det på ny ble grunnlagt i Tyskland, i forbindelse med Horkheimers og Adornos tilbakekomst etter annen verdenskrig. Hva empirien angår, ble arbeidet ledet av Ludwig von Friedeburg, mens Habermas blant annet skrev en teoretisk innledningen briljant 50 siders avhandling, der grunntankene i den foreliggende boken allerede kommer til uttrykk. Deretter fikk Habermas et stipend fra Det tyske forskningsråd for å kunne skrive Strukturforvandlingen av offentligheten, som den foreliggende boken het på tysk. Oversetterne til norsk valgte en litt mindre tung tittel, Borgerlig offentlighetdens fremvekst og forfall. Cambridge-historikeren T.C.W. Blanning har i ettertid skrevet om Borgerlig offentlighet: «Dette må sikkert vaere den mest innflytelsesrike akademiske avhandling som noen gang er trykket.» iii Her sikter han nok til avhandlinger som har vaert innlevert til doktorgrad eller habilitasjon, ikke avhandlinger i sin allmennhet. Det er likevel ikke lett å vurdere en slik påstand, og det slår meg at Michel Foucaults avhandling om Galskapens historie må vaere en svaert seriøs konkurrent. Men Blannings påstand står likevel; den står der hvor sannheter ifølge Adorno står best: på spissen. Slik er for øvrig også Habermas' bok: så omstendelig den ofte er formulert, så full av all slags kunnskap og synspunkter fra forskjellige teoritradisjoner den er, så nyansert og dialektisk naer sine teoretiske og politiske motstandere, så står boken likevel temmelig på spissen, blant annet med et ganske grelt kritisk perspektiv på etterkrigstidens velferdsstatlige demokratier, implisitt ikke minst

This article aims to investigate, from an interdisciplinary point of view, the concept of parliamentary immunity. The main objective of this inquiry is to identify the historical premises and the political, linguistic, and legal instruments that determined the conceptualization of parliamentary immunity in light of the main intellectual events in Romania and France. Embracing Reinhart Koselleck’s working methods, this research will develop in extenso a comparative conceptual analysis based on methodological rigor, emphasizing not only the importance of the concept after its entry into national languages, but also the political usages of the concept and the present understandings of it.

Este artigo aborda alguns dos sentidos da crise múltipla pela qual passamos (sanitária, política, econômica, moral etc.). Buscamos, primeiramente, restituir o termo crise ao seu sentido médico-filosófico, aquele referente ao diagnóstico de um momento no desenvolvimento de uma doença no qual se decide sobre a sua superação ou se sucumbe à morte. Em seguida, abordamos a obra de alguns autores pertencentes a certa tradição médico-filosófica – sobretudo Canguilhem, dentre os mais recentes –, com vistas a examinar o contexto de sua recepção no Brasil. Por fim, abordamos alguns propósitos que podem resultar de um exame crítico acerca da nossa crise atual, salientando a importância da escuta, da clínica e da recriação de nosso modo de vida.

Será a História verdadeiramente mestre da vida é uma pergunta provocatória mas também é a pergunta que servirá de base para este comentário de texto onde iremos ver as concepções em relação ao facto de a História ser ou não realmente mestre da vida, sendo que as ideias a serem postas são as de Reinhart Koselleck.

Az itt következő írás egyrészt a generációra vonatkozó elméletek fogalom-és hatástörténeti elemzéseinek rövid foglalatát szeretné adni, ami azonban nem pusztán elméleti bevezető a címben konkretizált témához, hanem azzal szervesen összekapcsolandó. Minden szó, metafora, fogalom, ami a fogalomtörténeti elemzések lehetséges tárgyaként jelenik meg, sokszor önmagában neutrális jelentésűnek hat. Ezt a látszatot igyekszik a történeti szemantika és a fogalomtörténet a mindenkori nyelvi univerzumon belüli vizsgálataival eloszlatni. A szavak nem önállóan, hanem más szavakkal való összekötöttségükben léteznek, sajátos jelentéstartalmaik is ennek megfelelően változnak. Az első három fejezet elemzései ezeket szeretné szabaddá tenni. Az első fejezetben a generáció antik és középkori jelentésmezői illetve elméletei kerülnek górcső alá, a másodikban a Koselleck által "nyeregkornak" nevezett időszakban (kb. 1750-1850) ismétlem meg a vizsgálatot. A felosztás természetesen önkényes és formális, de reményeim szerint rámutat arra a tulajdonképpeni paradigmaváltásra a generációval kapcsolatban, amit az "újkor" hoz magával. A harmadik fejezettől a modern generációfogalom filozófiai-történeti-szociológiai reflexióira irányul az elemzés Dilthey és Mannheim (4) gondolatain keresztül, ezt zárja Koselleck (5) bevonása a problémakörbe. lehetséges önleírását jelenti az idő-, társadalmi-és önviszonyulás tekintetében. Az említett kettős jelentésréteg hosszú múltra tekint vissza, s már a fogalom első filozófiai reflexiójában is megjelenik.

In 1917 the Provisional Government of the Russian Empire orders to the soldiers to renew their oath of allegiance, not to the decayed Emperor (Gosudar) but rather to the State (Gosudarstvo). Many soldiers refuse to do so and proclaim: «If there is no more Gosudar, there is no Gosudar- stvo». The elites understand: «If there is no Emperor, there is no State», even though the soldiers are saying «if there is no Master, there is no Master's domain». The immediate reason of this mis- understanding lies in the polisemy of the two Russian concepts, but its temporal structure is prob- lematic. The historical-conceptual analysis discovers a temporal relationship among concepts and states of things (Sachegeschichte) which is not visible from the social history's point of view.

En el presente trabajo expongo cómo ha evolucionado la teoría marxista del Estado. Partiendo desde la crítica marxiana a la filosofía hegeliana, tomo como marco teórico la interpretación marxista-leninista del Estado para analizar, a través de la historia de los conceptos (Begriffsgeschichte) de Reinhart Koselleck, como los cambios en la realidad político social y el contexto histórico-político sobre el que se producen las teorizaciones se ven reflejadas en el concepto Estado, que ha de adaptarse e incluir ese nuevo estado de cosas. Por último, analizo cual es la situación actual de la teoría del Estado desde una perspectiva marxista y propongo un camino a transitar para recuperar el enfoque marxista del Estado ante el nuevo cambio producido por la revolución neoliberal, entendida bajo el concepto gramsciano de revolución pasiva.

Niniejszy artykuł ma na celu krytyczne zestawienie dwóch perspektyw, istotnych dla badań szeroko rozumianej historii idei, czyli szkoły Cambridge z niemiecką tradycją Begriffsgeschichte. W pierwszej części tekstu wskazuję na główne podobieństwa między nimi, takie jak czas czy sposoby powstania. Część druga służy omówieniu i problematyzacji głównych kategorii badawczych, wypracowanych w ramach obu nurtów metodologicznych, takich jak akty mowy i pojęcia. Kolejno, w części trzeciej analizuję poziomy kontekstu, w ramach których pracują przedstawiciele obu tradycji, a także wskazuję na słabości czynionych w tej kwestii rozstrzygnięć. Część czwarta służy przytoczeniu zewnętrznych perspektyw, m.in. metod, wypracowanych przez Michaela Freedena, które pozwalają zobaczyć w nowym świetle brytyjską i niemiecką tradycję. Wreszcie, w podsumowaniu wskazuję na sensowność rozwoju tego typu refleksji oraz na wyzwania, przed którymi stoi historia idei w Polsce.

A presente dissertação consiste em um estudo acerca da semântica do tempo – isto é, de noções, concepções, representações, categorias e conceitos – mobilizada no e pelo discurso de reformistas ilustrados portugueses e espanhóis, tanto peninsulares como americanos, principalmente em escritos de cunho político e econômico que tratam de temas relativos às Américas Ibéricas entre c.1750 e c.1807. Fundamentada em pressupostos teórico-metodológicos oferecidos pela chamada história das linguagens políticas – considerando-se especialmente os aportes da História dos Conceitos promovida por Reinhart Koselleck –, este trabalho objetiva oferecer uma contribuição historiográfica pautada num estudo de ordem integrada no que diz respeito ao espaço de experiência colonial americano em relação à conjuntura global em que esses projetos de reforma se inseriram, partindo da identificação e análise de um vasto conjunto de palavras provenientes da transversalidade oblíqua do conceito de tempo tal como fora reivindicado em memórias, discursos, ensaios, reflexões, dissertações e cartas elaboradas no bojo do programa reformista ilustrado empreendido por Portugal e Espanha a partir da segunda metade do século XVIII até os primeiros anos do século XIX. Com isso, vislumbrou-se a obtenção de elementos fundamentais para a compreensão de algumas dimensões coincidentes dos reformismos ibéricos que dizem respeito às próprias formas de desenvolvimento das sociedades luso e hispano-americana de fins do Setecentos aos primeiros anos do Oitocentos, a fim de demonstrar que o exame do compartilhamento de uma experiência linguístico-conceitual comum aos dois Impérios consiste em uma profícua via de interpretação e compreensão, a partir da semântica do tempo, de alguns dos principais vetores de manifestação da experiência cognoscitiva da crise do sistema colonial tal como operara até o princípio do século XIX, da crise geral do Antigo Regime e do eflúvio da aceleração do tempo histórico quanto ao cenário ibero-americano.

The expression “political concepts” refers to concepts essential to any serious reflection on political life. This includes authority, democracy, equality, freedom, justice, power, and further concepts that represent fundamental political values and principles.  However, political concepts are political in a double sense: they refer to some central idea or issue of great political relevance, but the meanings of these concepts are also topics of perpetual debate. Political concepts are not simply used to describe political life, but constitute significant sites of political disagreement.

En el presente libro, Rodrigo Cordero invita a reconsiderar la centralidad que los conceptos tienen tanto en la comprensión como en la producción de la vida social. A través de lecturas de Adorno, Arendt, Koselleck y Luhmann, así como de una serie de escenas y fragmentos de la sociedad chilena contemporánea, propone explorar diversas maneras en que los conceptos operan en procesos sociales e históricos concretos, como archivos de significados y experiencias, ensamblajes de prácticas, campos de lucha, y agentes de imaginación política. En vez de utilizar los conceptos como fuentes de certidumbre y coherencia científica, el libro propone emplearlos como sitios de exploración de las incertidumbres y contradicciones de lo social.

La relación entre historia y experiencia siempre ha sido muy estrecha. Ambos conceptos están condicionados al transcurrir del tiempo, surgen alejándose del presente y proporcionan tanto conocimiento como habilidades. En el siglo pasado, el historiador alemán Reinhart Koselleck (1923-2006) realizó un breve análisis (a comparación de otros temas que analizó con mayor agudeza y en repetidas ocasiones) de la importancia de la experiencia en la reescritura de la historia, a través de sus trabajos sobre la teoría de la historia y la historia de los conceptos. El presente texto se basará en las propuestas de este autor. La importancia del estudio de las diferentes maneras de adquirir experiencia, radica en que “la historia trata, directa o indirectamente, de experiencias, propias o de otros” (2001, 50). El historiador realiza sus investigaciones en base a sus propias experiencias, y el cambio de éstas propicia nuevas formas de analizar la realidad, y por lo tanto da pie a nuevas investigaciones, reflexiones e interpretaciones de los fenómenos ya estudiados. De igual manera la aparición de nuevos métodos origina nuevas experiencias. Koselleck menciona que ambos conceptos tienen una connotación cercana: experiencia “significaba principalmente reconocimiento, investigación, examen” (Koselleck, 2001, 43), y el griego historien “incluía reconocer e investigar” (2001, 44). De este modo la historia se asocia desde un principio a la investigación, al conocimiento y a la experiencia. En un breve repaso de la relación histórica entre experiencia e historia podemos mencionar que en la época de la primera modernidad experimentar dejó de estar ligado a la investigación y se enfocó a la simple percepción de las cosas. En ese momento se dividió en dos: la experiencia vivencial (basada en la realidad vivida), y la experiencia reflexiva (basada en la actividad intelectual). El camino de la historia a ser una disciplina científica se da al separarse el acto de presenciar un hecho (el cual se vincula a la percepción como oír y ver), con la actividad reflexiva de reconocer e investigar los hechos. (Teoría de la Historia).

Este trabajo es una aproximación a la historia política conceptual. El planteamiento central es que el estudio de lo político desde esta perspectiva exige transitar desde la historia
de los conceptos políticos a la historia de los discursos políticos. Ello permite, por una parte, estudiar no sólo la realidad lingüística
o discursiva sino también la no discursiva, no sólo el lenguaje sino también las prácticas con significado y las redes conceptuales o discur- sos más amplios en los que estos se inscriben. Por otra parte, también permite dar prelación a la lucha política como variable explicativa del cambio en los significados de los conceptos a través del tiempo. Para desarrollarlo se realiza un diálogo entre distintas orientaciones: la his- toria conceptual de lo político de Rosanvallon, la historia conceptual de Koselleck, la arqueo- logía y genealogía foucaultianas y el análisis político del discurso de Laclau y Mouffe.

The degrowth literature contains several narratives about the " first use " of the term 'décroissance.' This literature usually dates the word's origin to the early or late 1970s. Both the quest to find the " first use " and the narratives around that supposed use are considered here from several perspectives.
First, the history of the word 'décroissance' is examined from its earliest roots up to around 1980. Then, after broadly characterizing what constitutes 'décroissance' in the sense used by the degrowth movement today (the " Political Denotation "), the paper analyzes the substance of the various published " first use " narratives. It turns out that none of the published narratives is correct, even if limited to the first use of the Political Denotation.
Next, the paper steps back and considers why the question of " first use " has attracted so many narratives at all. It suggests that this is part of an ongoing process of reflexivity within the degrowth movement that is giving rise to an " invented tradition " in the sense of Hobsbawm (1983). It proposes that various elements of an invented tradition, such as the identification of intellectual " precursors " /patriarchs, are already visible in the degrowth literature. The reception of Nicholas Georgescu-Roegen as a " father " of degrowth is considered in some detail.
A frequent element in creating such a tradition is the establishment of an orthodoxy by means of a restricted canon. The establishment of such an orthodoxy is not necessarily dependent on an intention to do so. The paper examines the role of such works as the recent degrowth " Vocabulary " edited by D'Alisa et al. (2015a) in establishing a canon de facto by means that include, but are not limited to, a radical under-representation of the Francophone and other degrowth literatures. In this context, the diffusion of the Vocabulary's " first use " narrative in the degrowth literature serves as an indicator of the work's potential influence as a canonical reference.
From the totality of these perspectives, the topic of the " first use " of 'décroissance' can be seen not as a mere retrospective philological curiosity, but as calling our attention to matters of some significance for future of the degrowth movement and the politics of degrowth. Possible futures to be avoided include (i) the premature establishment of orthodoxy in the degrowth movement, and (ii) the prolonged use of 'degrowth' as a political slogan, in the expectation that this term will reverse connotations associated with it for more than a millennium of Western history.

There are many ways to consider the philosophy of history. In this article, I claim that one of the most viable approaches to the philosophy of history today is that of critical theory of history, inspired by Reinhart Koselleck. Critical theory of history is based on what I call known history, history as it has been established and expounded by historians. What it contributes—its added value, so to speak—is a reflection on the categories employed to think about historical experience at its different levels, not only as a narrative but also as a series of events: their origins, contexts, terminology, functions (theoretical or practical), and, finally, eventual relevance.

History of concepts has influenced several political science disciplines: political philosophy, political theory, political history, history of social and political thought, even political analysis. Despite considerable interest of Soviet and post-Soviet humanities to the social and political vocabulary, for a long time this impact was not as noticeable in Russia as in the West. It was only in 2000-2010s when active development of corresponding scholar approaches started and the key works of R. Koselleck, K. Skinner and other scholars were translated. After Russian readers studied achievements of the leading schools, German Historical Institute in Moscow issued a translation of selected articles from the German dictionary «Geschichtliche Grundbegriffe: Historisches Lexikon zur politisch-sozialen Sprache in Deutschland» (1972-1997), edited by O. Brunner, W. Conze and R. Koselleck. This article reviews the translated book in the context of Russian studying of the history of concepts and the formation of this approach as a political sub-discipline. In accordance with the approach proposed by J. Farr, the methodological basis for the studying of social and political concepts should be «political theory of conceptual change» which deals with language as a political tool, and with conceptual changes as political changes. One of the characteristics of development of a scientific discipline is formation of a system of reference books. Russian scholars have already gained considerable experience in the study of social and political concepts, which allows to approach closely the issue of the preparation of reference books and systematic descriptions of Russian concepts.
История понятий оказала влияние на ряд политологических дисциплин: политическую философию, теорию политики, политическую историю, историю социально-политических учений и даже политический анализ. Несмотря на значительный интерес советской и постсоветской гуманитарной науки к социально-политической лексике, влияние этого направления в России долгое время было не столь заметным, как на Западе. Только в 2000-2010-х годах начинается активное освоение соответствующих научных подходов и изданы переводы основных работ Р. Козеллека, К. Скиннера и др. В завершение знакомства российского читателя с достижениями ведущих школ Германский исторический институт в Москве выпустил перевод избранных статей из словаря «Основные исторические понятия: Исторический словарь общественно-политического языка в Германии», изданного в Германии в 1972-1997 гг. под редакцией О. Бруннера, В. Конце и Р. Козеллека. В рецензии переводное издание рассмотрено в контексте не только изучения истории понятий в России, но и становления этого направления как политологической дисциплины. В соответствии с данным подходом, предложенным Дж. Фарром, методологической базой изучения общественно-политических понятий должна выступать «политическая теория концептуальных изменений», рассматривающая язык в качестве политического инструмента, а концептуальные изменения – во взаимосвязи с политическими изменениями. Одной из характеристик развития научной дисциплины является формирование системы справочных изданий. В России уже накоплен значительный опыт изучения общественно-политический понятий, что позволяет вплотную подойти к решению вопроса о подготовке справочных изданий и систематических описаний российских концептов.

Em fins da década de 1980 Michel de Certeau afirmava que o tempo era o impensado da História. Sendo o tempo a matéria prima e o próprio meio de produção de nosso conhecimento, o mesmo era pouco problematizado por nós historiadores. A obra aqui resenhada, Estratos do Tempo, de Reinhart Koselleck, carrega de seu título até sua última linha a preocupação em problematizar e pensar operacionalizações e experiências do tempo na história e na historiografia.

Dissertation an der Universität Leiden. Betreuer: Alex P. Schmid und Edwin Bakker.

Radikalismus und Extremismus werden zwar oft verwendet, doch sehen sie sich als Konzepte bzw. Begriffe beide der Kritik ausgesetzt; dies hat nicht zuletzt damit zu tun, dass ihre Grenzen unklar sind. Da der Extremismusbegriff durch Behörden und Organisationen die mit Sicherheitsaufgaben zu tun haben genutzt wird, um (potenzielle) Verfassungsfeinde zu markieren, sind klare Definitionen gesellschaftlich wünschenswert und damit auch ein wichtiges wissenschaftliches Unterfangen.
Bisher ist eine Vielzahl an disparaten Definitionen durch Behörden und Wissenschaft entwickelt worden. Eine anerkannte juristische Definition existiert in Deutschland nicht. Die geläufigen Definitionen werden in dieser Doktorarbeit gesammelt und analysiert, um so eine konsensfähige Definition erarbeiten zu können und das Verhältnis zwischen Radikalismus und Extremismus näher zu bestimmen. Zwei wissenschaftliche Methoden werden hierzu benutzt: die Begriffsanalyse nach Koselleck und die Konzeptanalyse nach Sartori. Die Analyse wird sich von dieser Basis ausgehend, kritisch mit der Konzeptualisierung von Radikalismus und Extremismus beschäftigen. Konsensdefinitionen von Extremismus und Radikalismus zu erarbeiten, ist das Ziel dieser Arbeit. Hierbei dient der Schmidsche Ansatz zur Formulierung einer akademischen Konsensdefinition des Terrorismus als Vorbild.

Radicalism and Extremism are words frequently used, but as concepts or terms, they are contested. This, in part, can be explained by the fact, that their meanings are somehow fuzzy. The term extremism is, in the German context, used by authorities and government agencies that have mandates to ensure public safety. They use it to mark the enemies of the constitution –which makes a clear definition important. Over many decades, a large number of definitions has been developed by authorities and academics. Nevertheless a legal definition that is generally accepted is still lacking in Germany. In this doctoral thesis, many definitions have been brought together and analyzed, in order to differentiate between radicalism and extremism. Two scientific methods have been utilised in order to achieve this goal: the terminological analysis method introduced by Koselleck and the conceptual analysis method proposed by Sartori. On the basis of these two approaches, one more historical, the other more comparative, this thesis critically reviews radicalism and extremism. The goal of the thesis is, to develop two consensus definitions of radicalism and extremism respectively. The academic consensus definition of terrorism, that Schmid developed between 1984 and 2011, serves as role model and example.
In a first step, the two different methodologies are explained. The historical term analysis, developed by Koselleck, is used in order to analyse the change of meanings of a term over time. The analytical concept analysis, developed by Sartori, is used in order to generate lexical competence of a concept by comparing it with neighouring concepts, so that it is possible to highlight the scope of its contemporary meaning.

Radicalisme en Extremisme zijn woorden die veel worden gebruikt, maar als concepten of termen betwist zijn. Dit kan deels verklaard worden doordat hun betekenissen vaag lijken te zijn. De term extremisme wordt in Duitse context gebruikt door autoriteiten en overheidsdiensten die publieke veiligheid als mandaat hebben. Het wordt gebruikt om vijanden van de grondwet aan te duiden –wat een duidelijke definitie vereist. Over een span van enkele decennia is er een groot aantal definities gemaakt door autoriteiten en academici. Desalniettemin is er nog altijd geen officiële definitie van extremisme in Duitsland die algemeen geaccepteerd is. In deze thesis zijn vele definities bijeen gebracht en geanalyseerd met als doel te differentiëren tussen radicalisme en extremisme. Er zijn twee wetenschappelijke methoden gebruikt om dit doel te bereiken: de terminologische analyse methode van Koselleck en de conceptuele analyse methode voorgesteld door Sartori. Op basis van deze twee aanpakken, de een meer historisch, de ander meer vergelijkend, worden radicalisme en extremisme kritisch beschouwd. Het doel van deze thesis is om twee definities te ontwikken, van radicalisme en extremisme, respectievelijk. De academische definitie van terrorisme, ontwikkeld door Schmid tussen 1984 en 2011, dient als rolmodel en voorbeeld.

Antes de su muerte, en 2006, Koselleck preparaba una introducción para "Historias de conceptos" que no llegó a completar más allá de algunas notas. Como informa Carsten Dutt, el plan de Koselleck era organizar la obra en varios capítulos que reflejaran los principales intereses investigativos de Koselleck (2012 [2006], p. 294). Empezando por las cuestiones teóricas y metodológicas centrales de la historia conceptual, la obra también abarca el análisis de algunos de aquellos conceptos fundamentales [Grundbegriffe] de la modernidad, sopesa los potenciales semánticos que fueron liberados desde la Ilustración en los lenguajes sociales y políticos modernos; y, por último, examina la historia constitucional y jurídica de Alemania, Francia e Inglaterra, desde un enfoque comparativo. Cada capítulo está compuesto por artículos y conferencias que Koselleck había publicado en numerosas compilaciones, en importantes revistas y en memorias de eventos académicos .  En un total de catorce artículos, la obra brinda una suerte de visión de conjunto respecto al proyecto de la historia conceptual. En las páginas siguientes nos proponemos hacer una revisión crítica de este texto.

Conceptual history is a mode of historical inquiry concerned with the problem of the change in the semantics of particular concepts. The article outlines its historical formation in both the disciplines of history (R. Koebner, O. Brunner, C. Schmitt, R. Koselleck) and of philosophy (R. Eucken, R. Eisler, E. Rothacker), its further institutional and intellectual development, as well as an overview of the major methodological issues. This article also puts conceptual history in the context of other fields with similar methodological concerns such as the history of ideas and mentalities, intellectual history, historical epistemology as well as Luhmann's sociology.

¿Qué significa decir violencia en los Andes de los siglos XVI y XVII? ¿Cómo ese decir se pudo transformar en acto de fuerza brutal de unos hombres y mujeres contra otros hombres y mujeres que fueron denominados indios?

El presente libro trata de responder a estas preguntas, y así se inscribe en un nuevo capítulo de la historia de la cultura política andina. En base al análisis conceptual se devela el discurso de la fuerza, que permite a unos dañar a otros, en virtud de una religión distinta, de una cultura diferente y de costumbres disímiles. Del mismo modo, en estas páginas se pondrá de manifiesto cómo el lenguaje crea el objeto al que las cóleras y odios se pueden dirigir sin discreción. Así, se dilucidan los mecanismos mediante los cuales hispanos, blancos criollos y mestizos ejercieron violencia contra las poblaciones nativas y sus descendientes; todo esto en contra de lo que la Monarquía Católica quería para sus vasallos indianos, que no era sino el buen gobierno, impregnado de justicia para unos y otros. Para estos fines, el autor analiza crónicas, relaciones, tratados y documentos de archivo que ponen de manifiesto lo dañado que se hallaba el cuerpo social del Perú virreinal.

The history of early modern Greek literature in general and of Cretan literature in particular is a history of “multiple temporalities” that are often perceived as discontinuities and ruptures. Literary historians in an effort to address the(ir) need for periodization do not hesitate to pull vertical dividing lines and to expel poets and works from the modern Greek literary “canon” based on prefabricated (and arbitrary) chronological schemes (e.g. the end of the “Middle Ages” must be installed in 1453 or at the end of the 15th century). In other cases, they attempt legitimate aesthetic evaluations based on stylistic characteristics of literary works, but at the same time they tend to suppress their contemporaneity or even worse to reverse data concerning these works: e.g. the romance Erotokritos and the tragedy Erofili, both written in Crete around 1600, most likely in the late 1590s, are considered examples of "Renaissance" and "Baroque" literature respectively, but their literary styles cannot lead to any safe conclusion as regards their chronological order nor can they be used as a conclusive argument to support that the "Baroque" Erofili follows chronologically the "Renaissance" Erotokritos. Unfortunately, early modern Greek literature comprises many undated works often accompanied with authors’ names for whom we actually lack biographical information. This increases the confusion of literary historians and often leads to colossal chronological errors:  one telling example is the older placement of Stephanos Sachlikes in the late 15th or 16th century, based on the existence of rhymes in his work, while archival research has proved beyond any reasonable doubt that he is an author of the 14th century. Yet, one rarely finds Sachlikes (who is the first eponymous author of early modern Greek literature) in discussions of periodization of modern Greek literature, for his mere existence in the 14th c. undermines internalized organization schemes that many researchers are not willing to abandon with ease.

In my paper, I discuss the notion of "early modern" in juxtaposition with notions like the "Middle Ages", the "Renaissance", "Baroque", etc., and I attempt to cast some light on the "asynchronicities of the contemporaneous" by borrowing terms and ideas from relevant theories on time and periodization by theorists like E. Bloch, B. Giesen and R. Koselleck (mostly, the notion of "multiple temporalities" and the distinction between “natural” and “historical” time). I examine three pairs of contemporaneous Cretan poets, Stephanos Sachlikes and Leonardos Dellaportas (14th c.), Petros Bergadis and Ioannis Pikatoros (15th c.), and Vitsentzos Kornaros and Georgios Chortatsis (16th c.). Each pair involves authors who acted at the same time in the same place, addressing to the same society and the same people, authors who were also often inspired by the same themes/subjects and developed an evident intertextual dialogue in their works. Nonetheless and despite their contemporaneity, their approaches, as reflected in these works, are so different (sometimes abysmally different) that oblige us to rethink not the dating of their works, but our own prejudices and prefabricated organization schemes. What is ultimately suggested is the need to avoid the schematization of the vacuum linear time of periodization and start to accept what existing data has been pointing to for many years: that historical time is not linear and homogenous, but rather complex and multilayered, consisting of various temporalities that each has different origins, different duration and moves at different speeds. This may underline the futility of our organizational efforts as regards the historical and literary past, but at the same time it offers a great advantage; for it can lead us to fairer evaluation of works and events alike, and may also protect us from frequent until recently prejudices and errors.

In the article we propose the theoretical differentiation of three different spectral forms that haunt modern history, two of them – which are better known – concern the temporal tensions between past, present and future, while the third concerns the relation between center and periphery of world-economies. We focus on this third type of phantasmagorical tension in order to explore the conditions for the emergence of modern historical time and for its contemporary exhaustion.

In this paper, I will elaborate on Edward Said’s philological methodology for proposing a “living philology” of crisis as an attempt to recover the kairotic dimension of life from the constitutive precarity of modernity. In Frames of War, Judith Butler suggested that modern society imposed a tragic condition of “precarity” onto life: established by the biopolitical state of exception that has become the rule, precarity is the constitutive dimension of the life in crisis, from which there is no protection because one must appeal to the very state from which protection is required. In the augmented reality of modern liberal societies, cultural concepts like crisis attained an unsettling ‘operative force’ that profoundly affects both the material and the qualitative experience of life. In Greek, kairos indicated the due-time of the affective and experiential dimension of life, opposed to chronos, the passing time of biological and physical cycles. If crisis is, indeed, a biopolitical technique of management that invests the material precarity shared by all human individuals in their everyday lives, living philology is a “technique of trouble” that allows to recover the qualitative dimension of life from the crisis-driven cultural logic of financial liberalism. Thus, the kairotic dimension is essential because only from its perspective becomes possible to flesh out the affective entailments of a life perpetually in crisis, piercing with critical eye the experiential dimension where bio-power exerts its most persuasive and violent effects. More than a simple toolbox, living philology can be an intellectual commitment to recovering the qualitative value of life from the alienating biopolitical practices of today’s society, and to understanding the fundamental importance of the aesthetic experience for the sake of our present and future potentials for emancipation and enlightenment.