In May 1968, Gilles Deleuze was an established philosopher teaching at the innovative Vincennes University, just outside of Paris. Félix Guattari was a political militant and the director of an unusual psychiatric clinic at La Borde. Their meeting was quite unlikely, yet the two were introduced in an arranged encounter of epic consequence. From that moment on, Deleuze and Guattari engaged in a surprising, productive partnership, collaborating on several groundbreaking works, including _Anti-Oedipus_, _What Is Philosophy?_ and _A Thousand Plateaus_. François (...) Dosse, a prominent French intellectual known for his work on the Annales School, structuralism, and biographies of the pivotal intellectuals Paul Ricoeur, Pierre Chaunu, and Michel de Certeau, examines the prolific if improbable relationship between two men of distinct and differing sensibilities. Drawing on unpublished archives and hundreds of personal interviews, Dosse elucidates a collaboration that lasted more than two decades, underscoring the role that family and history—particularly the turbulent time of May 1968—play in their monumental work. He also takes the measure of Deleuze and Guattari's posthumous fortunes and the impact of their thought on intellectual, academic, and professional circles. (shrink)

Ce livre est la première biographie consacrée à l'une des plus grandes figures intellectuelles et politiques du XXe siècle : Cornelius Castoriadis (1922-1997). Jeune résistant grec révolutionnaire menacé de mort par les staliniens, il arrive en France à l'âge de vingt-trois ans, alors que l'engouement pour l'URSS est à son zénith. Il contribue alors à créer, avec Claude Lefort et Jean-François Lyotard, l'une des branches les plus vivaces de la gauche radicale, « Socialisme ou Barbarie », qui deviendra ensuite une (...) revue mythique et l'une des grandes influences de Mai 68, notamment par sa critique de gauche des régimes dits « communistes ». Économiste, philosophe, psychanalyste, militant politique, Castoriadis est l'auteur d'une œuvre essentielle pour quiconque s'intéresse à la question de l'institution hors du cadre de l'État, dont il traite dans ce que l'on peut considérer comme l'un des maîtres ouvrages du XXe siècle, L'Institution imaginaire de la société (1975). Il n'a en effet cessé, en croisant l'analyse historienne et l'approche psychanalytique, de s'attacher à penser la conquête de l'autonomie comme condition de l'approfondissement démocratique. Fruit d'une enquête menée auprès d'une centaine de témoins, cet ouvrage permet enfin de lever le voile sur cette figure hors norme et trop méconnue, qui est restée marginale jusqu'au bout, malgré son élection comme directeur d'études à l'EHESS au début des années 1980. Celui en qui Pierre Vidal-Naquet voyait un « génie », et Edgar Morin un « Titan de l'esprit », est pourtant très certainement appelé, en ces temps de grandes turbulences des souverainetés établies, à devenir l'un des penseurs-clés du XXIe siècle. (shrink)

Content Description #Includes bibliographical references and index.

L’horizon politique au sens large a irrigué toute la pensée de Gilles Deleuze. Son parcours est jalonné d’engagements, mais dans un positionnement assez différent de celui de l’archétype de l’intellectuel universel, porte-parole de la justice face à la raison d’État tel qu’a pu l’incarner durant la même période son aîné Sartre. Il se situerait davantage comme un intellectuel..

An outgrowth of Dosse's History of Structuralism, Empire of Meaning is an extended encounter with some of the most influential French intellectuals.

La question se pose de savoir si la Justice est capable de réparer le tragique de l’histoire. François Dosse situe son analyse sur l’axe pragmatique de la préoccupation citoyenne exprimée par Ricœur, dès les premières lignes de La mémoire, l’histoire, l’oubli, lorsqu’il se dit troublé par le trop de mémoire ici et le trop d’oubli ailleurs. On assiste en effet à une judiciarisation progressive de la discipline historique. Elle se traduit par une inquiétante inflation mémorielle depuis la loi Gayssot (...) de 1990. La fonction du juge et de l’historien a certes des points communs, comme l’a montré Marc Bloch dans Apologie pour l’histoire ou Carlo Ginzburg dans Le juge et l’historien. Le juge d’instruction peut s’apparenter à l’historien, mais pas celui du siège qui doit rendre un jugement. Cette emprise progressive de la justice sur le passé a pour effet pervers une tentative de sanctuarisation des questions historiques. Ricœur nous aide à repenser les relations entre justice, histoire et mémoire en distinguant et en articulant ces diverses dimensions par un travail de clarification des concepts. Il permet de mieux articuler la fonction judiciaire, le travail de mémoire et l’opération historiographique en respectant la validité de chacune de ces dimensions. (shrink)

La question se pose de savoir si la Justice est capable de réparer le tragique de l’histoire. François Dosse situe son analyse sur l’axe pragmatique de la préoccupation citoyenne exprimée par Ricœur, dès les premières lignes de La mémoire, l’histoire, l’oubli, lorsqu’il se dit troublé par le trop de mémoire ici et le trop d’oubli ailleurs. On assiste en effet à une judiciarisation progressive de la discipline historique. Elle se traduit par une inquiétante inflation mémorielle depuis la loi Gayssot (...) de 1990. La fonction du juge et de l’historien a certes des points communs, comme l’a montré Marc Bloch dans Apologie pour l’histoire ou Carlo Ginzburg dans Le juge et l’historien. Le juge d’instruction peut s’apparenter à l’historien, mais pas celui du siège qui doit rendre un jugement. Cette emprise progressive de la justice sur le passé a pour effet pervers une tentative de sanctuarisation des questions historiques. Ricœur nous aide à repenser les relations entre justice, histoire et mémoire en distinguant et en articulant ces diverses dimensions par un travail de clarification des concepts. Il permet de mieux articuler la fonction judiciaire, le travail de mémoire et l’opération historiographique en respectant la validité de chacune de ces dimensions. (shrink)

La question se pose de savoir si la Justice est capable de réparer le tragique de l’histoire. François Dosse situe son analyse sur l’axe pragmatique de la préoccupation citoyenne exprimée par Ricœur, dès les premières lignes de La mémoire, l’histoire, l’oubli, lorsqu’il se dit troublé par le trop de mémoire ici et le trop d’oubli ailleurs. On assiste en effet à une judiciarisation progressive de la discipline historique. Elle se traduit par une inquiétante inflation mémorielle depuis la loi Gayssot (...) de 1990. La fonction du juge et de l’historien a certes des points communs, comme l’a montré Marc Bloch dans Apologie pour l’histoire ou Carlo Ginzburg dans Le juge et l’historien. Le juge d’instruction peut s’apparenter à l’historien, mais pas celui du siège qui doit rendre un jugement. Cette emprise progressive de la justice sur le passé a pour effet pervers une tentative de sanctuarisation des questions historiques. Ricœur nous aide à repenser les relations entre justice, histoire et mémoire en distinguant et en articulant ces diverses dimensions par un travail de clarification des concepts. Il permet de mieux articuler la fonction judiciaire, le travail de mémoire et l’opération historiographique en respectant la validité de chacune de ces dimensions. (shrink)

The new school of French history is in its glory. Calling itself “new,” however, was only an advertising gimmick in a consumer society, as the Annales school recently commemorated its ancestors and their ancient battles in a 1979 golden anniversary. Its roots trace back to the period between the two World Wars when die journal Annales d'histoire économique et social was first published. Since dien, this school has come to occupy a hegemonic position among historians. If there is anything new, (...) it is above all its assault on the media. Lacking any valid adversaries, the Annales historians went after all the media strongholds. (shrink)

THE ANNALES SCHOOL OF HISTORIoGRAPHy was A MAJOR INTELLECTUAL PROJECT WHOSE PHENOMENAL SUCCESS IN FRANCE MAKES ITS TACTICS WELL WORTH STUDY.

Le 20 mai 2005, Paul Ricœur nous quittait à l'âge de quatre-vingt-douze ans, après une traversée du siècle qu'il a fortement marqué. Il nous laisse une œuvre immense, véritable incitation/invitation au travail dont l'une des originalités aura été de conduire un dialogue constant de la philosophie avec son autre, notamment avec les sciences humaines. À l'heure des replis disciplinaires et des crispations institutionnelles, sa manière de faire dialoguer les savoirs semble plus nécessaire que jamais à. Le souci dont a fait (...) preuve Paul Ricœur pour éviter toute forme de rabattement, d'appauvrissement, est une leçon de méthode qui mérite d'être réfléchie. Par-delà le choc provoqué par sa disparition, les auteurs de ce livre montrent à quel point sa pensée est actuelle. Parvenant à vaincre les résistances disciplinaires, Ricœur a largement contribué à la réalisation du basculement interprétatif général que connaissent les sciences humaines. Cette ouverture vers un nouvel espace dialogique assurant une véritable humanisation des sciences humaines. Elle rend possible, au-delà des problèmes méthodologiques, le questionnement récent de celles-ci sur l'énigme jamais résolue de l'« être-ensemble ». (shrink)

La philosophie est aujourd'hui de retour pour éclairer les grands enjeux de cette fin de siècle. La quête du sens qu'exprime ce retour ne peut que rencontrer la figure et le parcours de Paul Ricœur : depuis les années trente, il a toujours conçu sa réflexion comme une forme d'engagement dans la Cité. Sa présence constante dans ce siècle ne sera jamais démentie. Maître à penser plus que maître penseur, ses travaux sont devenus une source majeure d'inspiration dans les domaines (...) les plus divers. François Dosse a mesuré, avec son Histoire du structuralisme, à quel point cette pensée a été ignorée dans les années soixante et soixante-dix. En historien, il réalise ici une biographie intellectuelle qui entend rendre justice à ce grand penseur dont l'œuvre se situe à la croisée de la tradition réflexive française, de la philosophie dite continentale et de la philosophie analytique, dans un constant souci d'articulation de leurs apports respectifs. Grâce à une vaste enquête auprès de 170 témoins et une étude fouillée des travaux de Paul Ricœur, l'auteur retrace la cohérence du parcours de sa pensée et ses rebondissements multiples, au gré des sollicitations de l'actualité. Outre l'œuvre elle-même, c'est dans la succession des lieux de mémoire - les camps de Poméranie orientale, le Chambon-sur-Lignon, Strasbourg, la Sorbonne, les Murs Blancs, Nanterre, Chicago... - et de ceux de ses groupes d'appartenance - le cercle de Gabriel Marcel, Christianisme social, Esprit, le laboratoire de phénoménologie... - que se dessine une identité à la fois plurielle du fait des appropriations multiples qu'elle suscite, et unitaire par la cohérence toujours préservée d'une vie de recherches. La passion qui anime cette mise en intrigue ne vise pas à ériger une nouvelle statue de commandeur. L'auteur entend simplement faire partager le don de soi de Paul Ricœur, source d'une sagesse communicative. Ce parcours est une invitation à ne pas céder au scepticisme et au cynisme, et à retrouver les voies de l'espérance par une mémoire toujours retravaillée. (shrink)

On savait qu'Emmanuel Macron a été l'assistant, puis l'intime, de Paul Ricoeur à partir de la fin des années 1990. Cette relation, le président de la République l'a évoquée en des termes émouvants : "La nuit tombait, nous n'allumions pas la lumière. Nous restions à parler dans une complicité qui avait commencé à s'installer. De ce soir-là commença une relation unique où je travaillais, commentais ses textes, accompagnais ses lectures. Durant plus de deux années, j'ai appris à ses côtés. Je (...) n'avais aucun titre pour jouer ce rôle. Sa confiance m'a obligé à grandir". Mais savait-on à quel point ce compagnonnage intellectuel a orienté, façonné, les choix politiques de celui qui est le premier président-philosophe de la Ve République? François Dosse, qui a été l'intermédiaire entre l'un et l'autre, examine à la loupe les discours et les écrits d'Emmanuel Macron et fait apparaître la richesse du legs confié à celui qui est aujourd'hui en charge du pouvoir. (shrink)

Luca M. Possati, Jean Grondin, Paul Ricoeur ; Aurore Dumont, François Dosse et Catherine Goldenstein, Paul Ricoeur: penser la mémoire ; Paul-Gabriel Sandu, Gert-Jan van der Heiden, The Truth of Language. Heidegger, Ricoeur and Derrida on Disclosure and Displacement ; Paul Marinescu, Marc-Antoine Vallée, Gadamer et Ricoeur. La conception herméneutiquedu langage ; Witold Płotka, Saulius Geniusas, Th e Origins of the Horizon in Husserl’s Phenomenology ; Delia Popa, Annabelle Dufourcq, La dimension imaginaire du réel dans la philosophie de Husserl (...) ; Maria GyemantDenis Seron, Ce que voir veut dire. Essai sur la perception ; Christian Ferencz-Flatz, Hans Friesen, Christian Lotz, Jakob Meier, Markus Wolf, Ding und Verdinglichung. Technik- und Sozialphilosophie nach Heidegger und der Kritischen Th eorie ; Bogdan MincăLarisa Cercel, John Stanley, Unterwegs zu einer hermeneutischen Übersetzungswissenschaft. Radegundis Stolze zu ihrem 60. Geburtstag ; Denisa Butnaru Johann Michel, Sociologie du soi. Essai d’herméneutique appliquée ; Ovidiu Stanciu, Jan Patočka, Aristote, ses devanciers, ses successeurs. Trad. fr. Erika Abrams ; Mădălina Diaconu, Emmanuel Alloa, Das durchscheinende Bild. Konturen einer medialen, Phänomenologie. (shrink)

Machine generated contents note: Introduction Henry Somers-Hall; 1. Deleuze and the history of philosophy Daniel W. Smith; 2. Difference and repetition James Williams; 3. The Deleuzian reversal of Platonism Miguel Beistegui; 4. Deleuze and Kant Beth Lord; 5. Phenomenology and metaphysics, and chaos: on the fragility of the event in Deleuze Leonard Lawlor; 6. Deleuze and structuralism François Dosse; 7. Deleuze and Guattari: Guattareuze and Co. Gary Genosko; 8. Nomadic ethics Rosi Braidotti; 9. Deleuze's political philosophy Paul Patton; 10. (...) Deleuze, mathematics, and realist ontology Manuel Delanda; 11. Deleuze and life John Protevi; 12. Gilles Deleuze's aesthetics of sensation Dorothea Olkowski; 13. Deleuze and literature Ronald Bogue; 14. Deleuze and psychoanalysis Eugene Holland; 15. Deleuze's philosophical heritage: unity, difference, and onto-theology Henry Somers-Hall. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:diacritics 30.2 (2000) 43-69 [Access article in PDF] Tracing Ricoeur Dudley Andrew François Dosse. Paul Ricoeur: Les Sens D'une Vie. Paris: La Découverte, 1997. [PR] The Time of the Tortoise Gilles Deleuze chose not to see the end of the century that Michel Foucault claimed would be named after him, a century that began just as philosophy registered the aftershocks caused by the work of his closest progenitors, (...) Nietzsche and Bergson. Amplifying the waves they made with tempests of his own, Deleuze tried to capsize the flat-bottom boat of academic philosophy by insisting that it look beyond its own discourse for both the life and the vocabulary to account for life that should be its only mission. Scanning French philosophy for what it might contribute to art, fiction, and cinema, I invoke the stirring character of Deleuze, but I do so to deflect attention to another figure, Paul Ricoeur, whom Deleuze conveniently sets off by contrast.Less than a decade since his death, Deleuze is in danger of having ceded his claim to Ricoeur, the real long-distance runner, who is now pressing his publications into the new century, moving relentlessly beyond his exhausted reviewers. Last year, a fanfare of publicity greeted La mémoire, l'histoire, l'oubli, another magisterial tome appearing too late to be included in François Dosse's intellectual biography or in my overview here, which lifts off from that biography. Ricoeur, destined to keep writing--unable to conclude his conversation with philosophy--has outlasted Deleuze, whose notoriety derives from the radical break he makes with the thought of our times, for his abrupt deviations and more abrupt conclusions. Ricoeur's reputation rests seldom on anything conclusive but instead on his persistent interaction with and deployment of so much of that thought. By accident or by savvy design, Ricoeur's trajectory (initiated in the phenomenological atmosphere of the prewar era) has taken him through myth criticism, psychoanalysis, structuralism, language philosophy, analytic philosophy, deconstruction, poetics, historiography, ethics, and epistemology. He carries his learning forward to each new endeavor, not believing in "the radical break" or the prefix post-.François Dosse tracks Ricoeur in a magnificent account that places its subject in relation to each of these movements. But Parisian academic fashion forms only one facet of a life whose brilliance is refracted as well by theology, politics, and a remarkable social network. The thickness of his life evidently provides Ricoeur the necessary ballast to maintain his orientation on the stormy seas of intellectual debate. In fact, across a span of seventy years of uninterrupted reading and writing, he has anticipated, invoked, or debated virtually every important school of French thought, doing so in a way that both establishes their value and serves his own agenda. Ricoeur profits from the productive tension that results, even--indeed, especially--when this brings about a dislocation of his views. These exchanges inevitably leave his own ideas clearer, more defensible, and invulnerable to charges of parochialism. Although Ricoeur concludes his three-volume Time and Narrative with an aggressive chapter explicitly asking, [End Page 43] "Should We Renounce Hegel?," there is something deeply Hegelian about this strategy of taking on, then managing to assimilate, all comers so as to emerge stronger. Ricoeur may not share Hegel's limitless arrogance (literally arrogating everything to himself), but his humility is equally ambitious.There was never any question for Deleuze about renouncing Hegel. His antipathy to this "philosophe de l'État" was immediate, total, and itself completely arrogant. As for Ricoeur, Deleuze apparently avoided the man Dosse dubs "philosophe de la Cité," at least before 1986. Then, he links their names after each had just published a multivolume treatise on temporality and fabulation, Deleuze's cinema books picking up the notion of "bifurcated time" that Ricoeur had just developed in Time and Narrative. Proust was explicitly a key source for both of their studies. But apparently, and outwardly, it gets no closer than this. In concatenating these two French philosophers, I follow the lead of Olivier Mongin, who finds them both to be supreme philosophers of time, yet incompatible on... (shrink)

Chaosophy is an introduction to Félix Guattari's groundbreaking theories of "schizo-analysis": a process meant to replace Freudian interpretation with a more pragmatic, experimental, and collective approach rooted in reality. Unlike Freud, who utilized neuroses as his working model, Guattari adopted the model of schizophrenia--which he believed to be an extreme mental state induced by the capitalist system itself, and one that enforces neurosis as a way of maintaining normality. Guattari's post-Marxist vision of capitalism provides a new definition not only of (...) mental illness, but also of the micropolitical means for its subversion. Chaosophy includes such provocative pieces as "Everybody Wants to Be a Fascist," a group of texts on Guattari's collaborative work with Gilles Deleuze, and "How Martians Make Love," a roundtable discussion with Guattari, Lotringer, Catherine Clément, and Serge Leclaire from 1972. This new, expanded edition features a new introduction by François Dosse and a range of additional essays, including "Franco Basaglia: Guerrilla Psychiatrist," "The Transference," "Semiological Subjection, Semiotic Enslavement," "The Place of the Signifier in the Institution," and "Three Billion Perverts on the Stand.". (shrink)

In May 1968, Gilles Deleuze was an established philosopher teaching at the innovative Vincennes University, just outside of Paris. Félix Guattari was a political militant and the director of an unusual psychiatric clinic at La Borde. Their meeting was quite unlikely, yet the two were introduced in an arranged encounter of epic consequence. From that moment on, Deleuze and Guattari engaged in a surprising, productive partnership, collaborating on several groundbreaking works, including _Anti-Oedipus_, _What Is Philosophy?_ and _A Thousand Plateaus_. François (...) Dosse, a prominent French intellectual known for his work on the Annales School, structuralism, and biographies of the pivotal intellectuals Paul Ricoeur, Pierre Chaunu, and Michel de Certeau, examines the prolific if improbable relationship between two men of distinct and differing sensibilities. Drawing on unpublished archives and hundreds of personal interviews, Dosse elucidates a collaboration that lasted more than two decades, underscoring the role that family and history—particularly the turbulent time of May 1968—play in their monumental work. He also takes the measure of Deleuze and Guattari's posthumous fortunes and the impact of their thought on intellectual, academic, and professional circles. (shrink)

In May 1968, Gilles Deleuze was an established philosopher teaching at the innovative Vincennes University, just outside of Paris. Félix Guattari was a political militant and the director of an unusual psychiatric clinic at La Borde. Their meeting was quite unlikely, yet the two were introduced in an arranged encounter of epic consequence. From that moment on, Deleuze and Guattari engaged in a surprising, productive partnership, collaborating on several groundbreaking works, including _Anti-Oedipus_, _What Is Philosophy?_ and _A Thousand Plateaus_. François (...) Dosse, a prominent French intellectual known for his work on the Annales School, structuralism, and biographies of the pivotal intellectuals Paul Ricoeur, Pierre Chaunu, and Michel de Certeau, examines the prolific if improbable relationship between two men of distinct and differing sensibilities. Drawing on unpublished archives and hundreds of personal interviews, Dosse elucidates a collaboration that lasted more than two decades, underscoring the role that family and history—particularly the turbulent time of May 1968—play in their monumental work. He also takes the measure of Deleuze and Guattari's posthumous fortunes and the impact of their thought on intellectual, academic, and professional circles. (shrink)

In the first English translation of his work, Laruelle explores the major European thinkers from Nietzsche to Derrida to define his own 'non-philosophical' ...

L'auteur consacre sa réflexion à l'amplification et à l'achèvement de la non-philosophie, en combinant science et philosophie qui sont considérées comme des variables définissant un espace ondulatoire et particulaire de l'opération de penser.

François Recanati; IV*—Contextual Dependence and Definite Descriptions, Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, Volume 87, Issue 1, 1 June 1987, Pages 57–74, h.

A defence of the 'pragmatic' theory of anaphora (which stresses the analogy between anaphora and deixis) against an argument put forward by Gareth Evans.

_A mood for Philosophy_ __ _ _ _In this dialogue with Francois Laruelle Anne-Françoise Schmidt suggests that Laruelle's non-philosophy, which begins with an indecision, could be conceived as something that in the history of painting has been called figura serpentinata, "serpentine line". This line, which produces a kind of music by the use of concepts, is visible according her trough his whole work: from his first book on Ravaisson, _Phenomenon and Difference,_ through to his last one, _The Last Humanity: (...) A New Ecological Science_, published in French in 2015 and expected to appear in English in 2018._. (shrink)

La philosophie bergsonnienne a rendu le monde de ses contemporains moins opaque, les aidant à lui trouver un sens. Si la France cartésienne coïncide avec les partisans de la démocratie parlementaire ancrée à gauche, celle de Bergson recrute ses plus gros bataillons dans la droite nationale, conservatrice, mais également dans une gauche antiparlementaire, révolutionnaire.

The central notion in this article is ‘pluriform accommodation,’ a term that we have coined to defend two lines of thought. The first is a plea for inclusive and consequential neutrality; the second is a closely linked plea for reasonable accommodation. With ‘pluriform accommodation’ we emphasize that the multicultural recognition scope should be expanded. The need for inclusive and accommodative rules, laws, and practices is a matter of principle and as such cannot be reduced to the inclusion of people with (...) an immigration background who bring with them all kinds of ethnocultural and religious practices, convictions, and traditions. Furthermore, the enshrined freedom of religion does not provide the needed protection for the multiplicity of conscientious identifications, convictions, and strong allegiances that might be central to one’s sense of self. We argue that we should not engage in (top down) debates about the rights of individuals and groups of different types and think in terms of identity hierarchies, but instead should consider the various claims being made (bottom up), aiming for common standards and criteria to assess the validity of these claims and the reasonableness of the associated accommodations. (shrink)

Response to Carston's paper, 'How Many Pragmatic Systems Are There'?

Are the things of this world given to thought? Are things really meant to be known, to be taken as the objective manifestations of a transcendental conditioning power? The Western philosophical tradition, according to François Laruelle, presupposes just this transcendental constitution of the real--a presupposition that exalts philosophy itself as the designated recipient of the transcendental gift. Philosophy knows what things really are because things--all things--are given to philosophy to be known. Laruelle's trenchant essays show how this presupposition controls even (...) the ostensibly radical critiques of the philosophical tradition that have proliferated in the postmodern aftermath of Nietzsche and Heidegger. For these critiques persist in assuming that the disruptive other is in some way given to their own discourse--which shows itself thereby to be still philosophical. An effective critique of philosophy must be non-philosophical. It must, according to Laruelle, suspend the presupposition that otherness is given to be known, that thought has a fundamentally differential structure. Non-philosophy begins not with difference, not with subject and object, but with the positing of the One. From this axiomatic starting point, non-philosophy takes as its material philosophy, rethought according to the One. The non-philosophy project does not, like so much postmodern philosophy, herald the end of philosophy. It takes philosophy as an occasion to raise the question of another kind of thought--one that, instead of differentially relating to the world that it presupposes, asserts that it is ultimately, in the flesh, at One with what it can never know. Publisher's note. (shrink)

Derrida often insists that ethics must be the experience and encounter of a certain impossible. A proposition all the more troubling, as it is proposed by Derrida in the context of a return precisely to the conditions of possibility of ethics. It will appear that returning to the possibilities of ethics implies a return to its limits, to its aporias, which are both constitutive and incapacitating, possibilizing and impossibilizing. The purpose of this paper is to begin exploring this aporetic structure (...) of ethics and to identify how it is tied to the impossible. I will pursue this inquiry by reconstituting how Derrida appropriates Heidegger's expression of "possibility of the impossible," and by reconstituting the aporias of the law, of moral decision, of responsibility, and of an ethics of hospitality as welcome of the event of otherness. (shrink)

Current philosophical accounts of causation suggest that the same causal assertion can have different meanings. Yet, in actual social-scientific practice, the possible meanings of some causal generalisations intended to support policy prescriptions are not always spelled out. In line with a standard referentialist approach to semantics, we propose and elaborate on four questions to systematically elucidate the meaning of causal generalisations. The analysis can be useful to a host of agents, including social scientists, policy-makers, and philosophers aiming at being socially (...) relevant. To illustrate our proposal, we analyse the complexities related to the meaning of causal generalisations in the context of a concrete case of economic research which is explicitly intended to guide public policy, namely, the OECD research on the causes of unemployment. (shrink)

Nanotechnology is an important platform technology which will add new features like improved biocompatibility, smaller size, and more sophisticated electronics to neuro-implants improving their therapeutic potential. Especially in view of possible advantages for patients, research and development of nanotechnologically improved neuro implants is a moral obligation. However, the development of brain implants by itself touches many ethical, social and legal issues, which also apply in a specific way to devices enabled or improved by nanotechnology. For researchers developing nanotechnology such issues (...) are rather distant from their daily work in the lab, but as soon as they use their materials or devices in medical applications such as therapy of brain diseases they have to be aware of and deal with them. This paper is intended to raise sensitivity for the ethical, legal and social aspects (ELSA) involved in applying nanotechnology in brain implants or other devices by highlighting the short term problems of testing and clinical trials within the existing regulatory frameworks (A), the short and medium-term questions of risks in the application of the devices (B) and the long-term perspectives related to problems of enhancement (C). To identify and address such issues properly nanotechnologists should involve ethical, legal and social experts and regulatory bodies in their research as early as possible. This will help to remove pressure from regulatory bodies, to settle public concern and to prevent non-acceptable developments for the benefit of the patients. (shrink)

L’invention au xii e siècle de la fin’amor va occuper, pour la première fois en Occident, le cœur du chant poétique, avec lequel il va entièrement s’identifier. Cette forme aristocratique, raffinée et intrinsèquement peccamineuse du sentiment amoureux exerce encore sur nos mœurs une profonde influence alors même que nous avons tendance à confondre mariage, amour et sexualité. Ne faut-il pas pourtant toujours, à l’amour, une « racine d’impossible » pour utiliser un terme commun à J. Lacan et à G. Bataille?

The Presentation of Sacher-Masoch is Deleuze’s boldest establishment of the three-way relation Art-Desire-Law, rich with consequences in the attempt to find new foundations for critique. Rather than trying to rethink Kant with Sade, Deleuze chose to rethink Kant with Masoch, treating the latter as a therapist as well as an artist.