2021-11-162021-11-162021-09-01CORDEIRO FILHO, Flávio de Lima. A Parresia nos cursos de Foucault de 1982-1984: ética, politica e estética. Orientador: Ernani Pinheiro Chaves. 2021. 90 f. Dissertação (Mestrado em Filosofia) - Instituto de Filosofia e Ciências Humanas, Universidade Federal do Pará, Belém, 2021. Disponível em: http://repositorio.ufpa.br/jspui/handle/2011/13739. Acesso em:.https://repositorio.ufpa.br/handle/2011/13739Michel Foucault's work (1926-1984) has a great conceptual scope, covering topics such as Madness, Power and even his debate on Truth. The focus of this dissertation will be his final writings, referring to the years 1982 to 1984, as it is within the courses given at the Collège de France where Foucault will work more specifically on notions of ethics, aesthetics and truth. Michel Foucault makes a return to classical antiquity, however such return has a specific concept in mind: parresia. Parresía is translated by Foucault as “courage of the truth”, “speakout”, “saying everything”, but the focus of the analysis of the French philosopher will be how such concept is deeply linked with the philosophical practice of antiquity, going through since from the political consequences of the use of parresia, the construction of an ethos, which in turn is linked with an aesthetic of the “true-tell”. Foucault will show that the concern with Truth is not only related to the epistemological debate between truth versus falsehood, that is, it is not in the French philosopher's interest to enter into the discussion of what makes a discourse and/or knowledge true. Foucault wants to investigate what makes the subject someone who tells the truth and how he is recognized as one who carries a true discourse. We realize that there is in Foucault a concern for the truth as the subject's trainer, how is frank speaking an influence in the formation of a subject? With that, Foucault claims that he will leave aside the “epistemological structures” to be concerned with the analysis of the “alleturgical forms” of the act of uttering the truth. Foucault will differentiate between “know yourself” and “take care of yourself” both Socratic formulations, however as each will develop and formulate distinct doctrines in the history of philosophy, while the former will hold a In the more epistemological/ metaphysical development of Socratic philosophy, the second will stick to a way of life, that is, a Socratic ethics. However, Foucault points out conditions for effecting parresia, in addition to the need to say everything, there is an urgent need to be a discourse totally linked to the thought of the one who speaks, so it is not merely an artificial speech. That is why the French philosopher says that parresia is not a mere adequacy of speech and thought, as the masters do, it is necessary to take a kind of vital risk, which will hurt and irritate the other, reaching the point of extreme violence, as soon as at the risk of losing the bond with the other. That is why it is important to emphasize the essential difference between rhetoric and parresia, placing the two attitudes in diametrically opposite ways, while one is a speech without any link with the interlocutor and with what is being said, parresia is a connection between the interlocutors , a bond so strong that it sets precedents for the rejection, punishment and revenge of the one who told the truth.Acesso Abertohttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/br/ParresiaÉticaEstéticaVerdade e FoucaultEthicsAestheticsTruth and FoucaultA Parresia nos cursos de Foucault de 1982-1984: ética, politica e estéticaDissertaçãoCNPQ::CIENCIAS HUMANAS::FILOSOFIA::ETICAESTÉTICA, ÉTICA E FILOSOFIA POLÍTICAFILOSOFIA