As the work of thinkers such as Michel Foucault, François Jacob, Louis Althusser, and Pierre Bourdieu demonstrates, Georges Canguilhem has exerted tremendous influence on the philosophy of science and French philosophy more generally. In Knowledge of Life, a book that spans twenty years of his essays and lectures, Canguilhem offers a series of epistemological histories that seek to establish and clarify the stakes, ambiguities, and emergence of philosophical and biological concepts that defined the rise of modern biology. How (...) do transformations in biology and modern medicine shape conceptions of life? How do philosophical concepts feed into biological ideas and experimental practices, and how are they themselves transformed? How does knowledge "undo the experience of life so as to help man remake what life has made without him, in him or outside of him?" Knowledge of Life is Canguilhem's effort to explain how the movements of knowledge and life come to rest upon each other. Published at the dawn of the genetic revolution and still pertinent today, the book tackles the history of cell theory, the conceptual moves toward and away from mechanical understandings of the organism, the persistence of vitalism, and the nature of normality in science and its objects. (shrink)

The idea of nature in medical theory and practice -- Diseases -- Health: popular concept and philosophical question -- Is a pedagogy of healing possible? -- The problem of regulation in the organism and in society.

Em 1973, Georges Canguilhem publica, na Encyclopédie Universalis, um extenso verbete histórico do conceito “Vida” na biologia e nas ciências da vida. A seguinte tradução do verbete é baseada na segunda edição, reimpressão publicada em 1989, nas páginas 546-553.

D'ordinaire, pour un philosophe, entreprendre d'écrire une morale, c'est se préparer à mourir dans son lit. Mais Cavaillès, au moment même où il faisait tout ce qu'on peut faire quand on veut mourir au combat, composait une logique. Il a donné ainsi sa morale, sans avoir à la rédiger.

Canguilhem is known to have regretted, with some pathos, that Life no longer serves as an orienting question in our scientific activity. He also frequently insisted on a kind of uniqueness of organisms and/or living bodies – their inherent normativity, their value-production and overall their inherent difference from mere machines. In addition, Canguilhem acknowledged a major debt to the German neurologist-theoretician Kurt Goldstein, author most famously of The Structure of the Organism in 1934; along with Merleau-Ponty, Canguilhem (...) was the main figure who introduced the work of Goldstein and his ‘phenomenology of embodiment’ into France. In this paper I inquire if we should view Canguilhem and Goldstein as ‘biochauvinists’, that is, as thinkers who consider that there is something inherently unique about biological entities as such, and if so, of what sort. (shrink)

pt. 1. Gaston Bachelard's historical epistemology.--pt. 2. For a critique of epistemology.

In this paper we examine aspects of Canguilhem’s philosophy of biology, concerning the knowledge of life and its consequences on science and vitalism. His concept of life stems from the idea of a living individual, endowed with creative subjectivity and norms, a Kantian view which “disconcerts logic”. In contrast, two different approaches ground naturalistic perspectives to explore the logic of life and the logic of the living individual in the 1970s. Although Canguilhem is closer to the second, there (...) are divergences; for example, unlike them, he does not dismiss vitalism, often referring to it in his work and even at times describing himself as a vitalist. The reason may lie in their different views of science. (shrink)

Canguilhem’s contemporary relevance lies in how he critiques the relation between knowledge and life that underlies Kantian rationality. The latter’s Critique of Pure Reason and Critique of Judgment represent life in the form of an exception: life is simultaneously included and excluded from understanding. Canguilhem’s critique can be grouped into three main strands of argument. First, his reference to concepts as preserved problems breaks with Kant’s idea of concepts regarding the living as a ‘unification of the manifold’. Second, (...) Canguilhem’s vital normativity represents life as the potential to resist normative orders that judge the living, relegating Kant’s ‘lawfulness of the contingent’ to a ‘mediocre regularity’. Third, Canguilhem’s introduction of the environment as a ‘category of contemporary thought’ decentres the living/knowing subject and introduces contingency. His idea of the ‘knowledge of life’ leads to the conclusion that life is the condition of possibility of rationality, rather than rationality’s ‘blind spot’. (shrink)

This paper outlines a hypothesis regarding the close connection between two problems in Georges Canguilhem’s work. The first problem is that of Canguilhem’s insistence to include considerations about natural selection in his work and of the role that this notion could play therein. The second problem consists in Canguilhem’s tendency to often use the term “life” as the subject of his sentences, even though this tendency may seem to at least partially contradict some of the central theses (...) advanced in his philosophy. This paper attempts to show that these two problems should not be viewed as being isolated from one another, that there is a strong connection between the two and that a certain interpretation of the first one allows us to make sense of the second. To put it otherwise, the aim of this paper is to show that a particular interpretation of the role of natural selection in Canguilhem’s work could help explain why “life” plays the role of a preferred grammatical subject in his writings. (shrink)

We examine aspects of Canguilhem’s philosophy of biology, concerning the knowledge of life and its consequences on science and vitalism. His concept of life stems from the idea of a living individual endowed with creative subjectivity and norms, a Kantian view which “disconcerts logic.” In contrast, we examine two naturalistic perspectives in the 1970s exploring the logic of life (JacobJacob, François) and the logic of the living individual (MaturanaMaturana, Humberto and VarelaVarela, Francisco). Canguilhem can be considered to be (...) a precursor of the second view, but there are divergences; for example, unlike them, he does not dismiss vitalism, often referring to it in his work, and even at times describing himself as a vitalist. The reason may lie in their different views of science. (shrink)

For Elisabeth Roudinesco, a historian of psychoanalysis and one of France's leading intellectuals, Canguilhem, Sartre, Foucault, Althusser, Deleuze, and Derrida represent a "great generation" of French philosophers who accomplished remarkable work and lived incredible lives. These troubled and innovative thinkers endured World War II and the cultural and political revolution of the 1960s, and their cultural horizon was dominated by Marxism and psychoanalysis, though they were by no means strict adherents to the doctrines of Marx and Freud. Roudinesco knew (...) many of these intellectuals personally, and she weaves an account of their thought through lived experience and reminiscences. Canguilhem, for example, was a distinguished philosopher of science who had a great influence on Foucault's exploration of sanity and madness-themes Althusser lived in a notorious personal drama. And in dramatizing the life of Freud for the screen, Sartre fundamentally altered his own philosophical approach to psychoanalysis. Roudinesco launches a passionate defense of Canguilhem, Sartre, Foucault, Althusser, Deleuze, and Derrida against the "new philosophers" of the late 1970s and 1980s, who denounced the work-and sometimes the private lives-of this great generation. Roudinesco refutes attempts to tar them, as well as the Marxist and left-wing tradition in general, with the brush of Soviet-style communism. In Freudian theory and the philosophy of radical commitment, she sees a bulwark against the kind of manipulative, pill-prescribing, and normalizing psychology that aims to turn individuals into mindless consumers. Intense, clever, and persuasive, _Philosophy in Turbulent Times_ captivates with the dynamism of French thought in the twentieth century. (shrink)

En este artículo se defiende la tesis de que la noción de vida, en la obra de Foucault, no es sólo el correlato de prácticas históricas de poder y saber. Foucault sostiene una ontología vitalista, intermitente y no del todo explícita. La fuente de esta opción filosófica en Foucault no es nietzscheana ni deleuziana, sino que coincide en muchos aspectos con el vitalismo no esencialista de Georges Canguilhem. En primer lugar comparamos la relación de Canguilhem y de Foucault (...) con la tradición kantiana, en su vertiente crítica y trascendental. En segundo lugar, comparamos la noción de vida en las propuestas filosóficas de Canguilhem y Foucault. Por último analizamos la procedencia canguilhemiana del concepto foucaultiano de normalización. Esta filiación se advierte también en el concepto de biopolítica, referido a un poder que actúa sobre la vida, imitando su funcionamiento. Este arraigo del pensamiento de Foucault en el vitalismo de su maestro permite resolver dos tensiones internas en la trayectoria del primero: la justificación de los movimientos de revuelta y el carácter autoformativo de la subjetividad. (shrink)

This article explores the links between the philosophies of Georges Canguilhem and Gilbert Simondon. It highlights their shared emphasis on the difficult character of human life, framing this difficulty in terms of an existential encounter with problems and their resolutions. It shows how the notion of ‘problem’ which grounds both of their thinking presupposes a neo-vitalist conception of life as purposive behaviour, extended to forms of collective, technical and symbolic activity. The consequences of this conception for Canguilhem's and (...) Simondon's engagement with questions of pedagogy, and the role of philosophical education in particular, are then examined. The article concludes by considering the ambiguous place of anxiety in their work and its significance for thinking about the conditions of knowledge and action. Following Canguilhem and Simondon, I argue for the importance of helping the human organism develop relatively autonomous interior and exterior milieus to cope with life's fundamental difficulty. (shrink)

O presente trabalho pretende comparar o debate ocorrido entre Georges Canguilhem e Robert Pagès em Qu’est-ce que la Psychologie?, de 1956, com os escritos de Michel Foucault publicados nos anos 1950. Para isso, após alguns apontamentos históricos, faz-se uma breve análise dos textos de Foucault publicados em 1954, Maladie Mentale et Personnalité e a Introduction à Le Rêve et l’Existence. Os textos de Foucault são então confrontados com o debate entre Canguilhem e Robert Pagès, que por sua vez (...) são analisados e comparados com outros dois textos de Foucault publicados em 1957, La Psychologie de 1850 à 1950 e La Recherche Scientifique et la Psychologie. Tenta-se mostrar que o início da trajetória de Foucault não apenas dialoga com diversos temas sobre a Psicologia e as Ciências Humanas colocados por Canguilhem e Pagès, mas também ensaia respostas cujo teor será mais visível em Folie et Déraison e na Introduction à l’Anthropologie de Kant. (shrink)

The living body appears like an endlessly renewable reservoir of authenticity, hope, and taboo. But, for the sake of conceptual clarity, we are often been told that the (mere) body should be distinguished from the flesh. That is, it’s undeniable that I have a body; that I notice yours; that we worry about their birth and death and upkeep. But the flesh is a more transcendentalized, loaded concept – not least given its frequently religious background (incarnation: the Word made Flesh). (...) It is the body ‘kicked upstairs’, ‘bumped up’ one ontological level. Flesh is like a mantra, an obsessive leitmotif. Is the difference just one of abstraction? Indeed, crucial to the narrative of phenomenology (most obviously in Merleau-Ponty but really, throughout, including in enactivism), to the story of ancestor worship and identity it tells itself and its acolytes around the campfire, is a basic distinction between the merely physical body and the flesh as something requiring ‘mineness’, namely, an understanding of it as uniquely ‘my own’, a feeling of ‘what it is like to be embodied’. This goes back to the Husserlian distinction between Körper, ‘body’ in the sense of one body among others in a vast mechanistic universe of bodies, and Leib, ‘flesh’ in the sense of a subjectivity which is the locus of experience. In this essay I reflect on this vision of the body’s authenticity and its costs, and contrast it with insights derived from Georges Canguilhem, whose critique of mechanism/mechanicism is not done in the name of a wholescale organicism and/or an unproblematized éloge of embodiment and privacy. (shrink)

In this essay, I examine the role of ancient Greek medicine and philosophy in Georges Canguilhem’s analysis of vitalism at the intersection of history and philosophy in his essay “Aspects of Vitalism” in light of larger questions about the historicity of “life” as a concept in the history and philosophy of science and contemporary biopolitical theory. Vitalism, for Canguilhem, is not a proper object of the history of science. But nor is it a philosophy that exists outside of (...) historical time. I show how Canguilhem embeds vitalism both historically and trans-historically by threading each of its three “aspects” in the essay through ancient Greece. Canguilhem distinguishes his own understanding of both life and vitalism from that of the “classical” vitalists of the eighteenth century by refusing to read ancient Greece as romantically naïve or pre-technological and instead locating a dialectic between vitalism and mechanism already in antiquity. I argue for a critical re-reading of Canguilhem’s own conjunction of vitalism and Hellenism that resists its figuration of ancient Greece as the place where the human qua species first comes to take itself as an object of knowledge. I instead propose reading ancient Greek medical and philosophical texts that are read and reread in debates about the nature of human life and the life of Nature over millennia as part of a milieu that shapes how contemporary thinkers theorize life in the interest of human flourishing. (shrink)

This paper brings Georges Canguilhem and Gilles Deleuze together with the contemporary biologist Mary Jane West-Eberhard. I examine the concepts of adaptation and adaptivity in Canguilhem’s The Normal and the Pathological in light of West-Eberhard’s notion of “developmental plasticity,” which is, I claim, adaptivity in the developmental register. In turn, I interpret Canguilhem’s notion of “comparative physiology” and West- Eberhard’s notion of an “eco-devo-evo” approach to biology in terms of Deleuze’s notion of multiplicity.

A relação entre o vital e o social no pensamento de Georges Canguilhem envolve uma específica reestruturação filosófica, por ele empreendida em O normal e patológico, realizando um deslocamento teórico em face das análises quantitativas da saúde quanto, ao mesmo tempo, construindo uma problemática própria a respeito da normação, fazendo com que o vital seja pensado, inexoravelmente, como a imbricação do biológico com o social, acarretando, ainda, um reposicionamento político, crítico, no que tange à consideração sobre saúde e doença.

La pensée de Georges Canguilhem (1904-1995) connaît un regain d'intérêt dans les lieux académiques et de recherche. Ainsi, eut lieu à l'Université Paris-1 un colloque international intitulé «Un nouveau Canguilhem? » pour la parution des Oeuvres complètes jetant une nouvelle lumière sur des écrits de jeunesses peu connus. Mais que peut-on apprendre de ces manuscrits privés? Ces écrits inédits confirment-ils l'opinion vague qui lie le philosophe aux sciences naturelles? Ce livre privilégie un autre angle: Canguilhem en philosophe (...) de l'action. (shrink)

Review of "Maß und Eigensinn. Studien im Anschluß an Georges Canguilhem“, ed. by Cornelius Borck, Volker Hess and Henning Schmidgen, München (Fink Verlag) 2005.".

A epistemologia histórico-racionalista de Canguilhem, seu gosto pelo concreto, as áreas a que se refere - a medicina, o estudo da patologia, a fisiologia, a biologia - parecem longe dos grandes estudos metafísicos do "primeiro" Deleuze e de seu interesse pela sistematização conceitual abstrata. Mas nos situaremos aqui num outro nível: o dos problemas e projetos filosóficos. Sobre esse plano, apresentamos o entrecruzamento das leituras do Essai e de Nietzsche et la philosophie, para ver como é esclarecedor: enquanto um (...) Canguilhem menos exclusivamente racionalista aí aparece, vemos na pesquisa filosofia efetivada por Deleuze algo distinto de um gesto que eleva a reflexão a um grau suplementar de abstração. Mais profundamente, tal aproximação coloca sob novas perspectivas a tripla significação da refundação do criticismo kantiano como uma filosofia de valores, de sua relação com uma "filosofia de vida" e de seu ponto culminante na problematização da imagem do pensamento.  . (shrink)