National-developmentist thought and the Álvaro V. Pinto's ontology of Nation

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.4322/principios.2675-6609.2021.162.008

Keywords:

Álvaro Vieira Pinto, National question, National-developmentalism, Ontology of nation, Marxism

Abstract

This article object is to examine what is the nation on ontological perspective. This perspective is a philosophical approach that aims localize and determine the essence of something. The essence is the question concerning what is the nation and which perspectives and interests are included for project affirmation. The objective is verify, on Álvaro Vieira Pinto’s framework, the current of national-developmentalism project. The problem is: is there an ontology of nation on Álvaro Vieira Pinto’s thought? The hypothesis defended is that is impossible to exist a concrete and effective essence without a project that “prospect and been” a development that embodies the majority of the nation. This kind of non-excludable, non-alienating, democratic, popular and independent project cannot only be formal, but rather express a democracy of a material character. About the method, this is a bibliography research, focusing on national-developmentalism thought and also it is based on Marxist philosophical tradition in dialog with ontological philosophy authors.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biography

Enoque Feitosa Sobreira Filho, Universidade Federal da Paraíba

Doutor em Direito pela Universidade Federal de Pernambuco (UFPE) e em Filosofia pela Universidade Federal da Paraíba (UFPB). Professor Associado III. Docente nos programas de pós-graduação em Direito e em Filosofia na UFPB. É um dos coordenadores do Núcleo de Pesquisa Marxismo, Realismo, Teoria e Filosofia do Direito. Coordenou o Projeto Capes-AULP, de 2014 a 2019, entre UFPB e Universidade Eduardo Mondlane (UEM, Moçambique).

Published

2021-09-02

How to Cite

Feitosa Sobreira Filho, E. (2021). National-developmentist thought and the Álvaro V. Pinto’s ontology of Nation. Princípios, 40(162), 162–180. https://doi.org/10.4322/principios.2675-6609.2021.162.008