O sentido do engajamento entre os pesquisadores da Universidade Estadual de Maringá à luz da ética do sujeito de Michel Foucault

Abstract

This research is based on Foucault's view that in all relationships, individuals are never an inert target or consent to power, but they are always intermediaries, leading to oneself and/or others. Regarding the relation of a subject with himself, Foucault called ethics the way of being of the subject and the relationship of this subject with himself and with the rule to which he is conected. Thus, we understand that the work ethic presupposes an engagement by the subject, necessary to transform him into what he professes to be through the discourse that guides him. We take as reference the concept of engagement of Shaufeli and Bakker (2010), understanding that engagement refers to an affective-cognitive state more persistent and pervasive, involving vigor, dedication and absorption in a job. In this sense, this research proposes to understand what is the sense of engagement with the academic production among researchers of the State University of Maringá (UEM) in light of the subject ethics of Michel Foucault. To Achieve this, we interviewed twelve researchers linked to the doctoral programs of UEM and analyzed documents that govern the academic production of the same. The analysis and description of the results were organized according to the four ways listed by Foucault in which we can analyze the different ways to lead morally: the ethical substance, the subjection modes, the preparation of the work ethic and the teleology of the subject. We have seen that in conducting themselves, the researchers impose certain personal practices, for example, publishing goals, choice of qualified journals, financial expenditure, working out of place and time established in the contract, dedication, vigor and absorption in what they do. While recognizing the need for publication resulting from the whole system, the researchers advocate the need to find meaning in what they do. They recognize that they are not acting under coercion, pressure or obligation; because if so, would only be publishing two articles per year as required by CAPES or by programs. The fact is that they produce more than required, tying the engagement in academic production to other reasons, such as human resources training, passion for research and commitment to society