The purpose of this paper is to examine the liturgical spirituality of Virgil Michel through some of the literature he left behind. It is important to note that it would be difficult to derive Virgil Michel’s spirituality, solely from his own works, since the texts in general do not delve deeply into the background and context of his life. This is why secondary sources written about Virgil Michel were also consulted and played a role (...) in the research. Several of his major works were essential to the research, these include: an article entitled the “Significance of the Liturgical Movement” and two books entitled, The Liturgy of the Church and Christian Social Reconstruction. All of these sources provided important insights into Virgil’s liturgical spirituality, while the secondary sources helped make sense of material regarding Virgil’s life that were not directly accessible through his own literature. (shrink)

Sheehan deals with relatively recent authors—Conrad, D. H. Lawrence, Virginia Woolf, Beckett. He is critical of humanism, by which he seems to understand a kind of anthropocentric and limitative image of human beings, imposed on the public by narrative, among other things. As against this, he is setting the animal, the mechanical, and the transcendental, but the definition of the latter is, to say the least, bizarre—“the ability to evade compromise and contingency”. Reformulating narrativity is, according to Sheehan, the best (...) attempt or search by the moderns to define a new kind of human. His whole project is, to put it bluntly, rather confused. There are some intelligent and original commentaries on Schopenhauer, for instance but Sheehan soon falls back under the spell of Michel Foucault, Edward Said, and Terry Eagleton and seems to contribute rather few original comments to the discussion. In a word, this is a good example of how the interface philosophy/literature ought not to be visited. (shrink)

Influential philosopher Michel Serres’s foundational work uses fable to explore how human relations are identical to that of the parasite to the host body. Among Serres’s arguments is that by being pests, minor groups can become major players in public dialogue—creating diversity and complexity vital to human life and thought. Michel Serres is professor in history of science at the Sorbonne, professor of Romance languages at Stanford University, and author of several books, including _Genesis._ Lawrence R. Schehr is (...) professor of French at the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign. Cary Wolfe is Bruce and Elizabeth Dunlevie Professor of English at Rice University. His books include _Zoontologies: The Question of the Animal _. (shrink)

Language and the birth of "literature." A preface to transgression. Language to infinity. The father's "no." Fantasia of the library.--Counter-memory: the philosophy of difference. What is an author? Nietzsche, genealogy, history. Theatrum philosophicum.--Practice: knowledge and power. History of systems of thought. Intellectuals and power. Revolutionary action: "until now.".

Michel Serres is one of the most influential living theorists in European philosophy. This volume makes available a work which has a foundational place in the development of chaos theory, representing a tour de force application of the principles underlying Serres' distinctive philosophy of science.

Although an elusive concept, "camp" can be found in most forms of artistic expression, revealing itself through an aesthetic of deliberate stylization. Fashion is one of the most overt and enduring conduits of the camp aesthetic. As a site for the playful dynamics between high art and popular culture, fashion both embraces and expresses such camp modes of enactment as irony, humor, parody, pastiche, artifice, theatricality, and exaggeration. Drawing from Susan Sontag's seminal essay "Notes on 'camp,'" the book explores how (...) fashion designers have used their metier as a vehicle to engage with the camp aesthetic in compelling, humorous, and sometimes incongruous ways. As a sartorial manifestation of the camp sensibility, this thought-provoking publication contributes new theoretical and conceptual insights into the camp canon through texts and images. Stunning new photography by Johnny Dufort highlights works by such fashion designers as Virgil Abloh, Thom Browne, Jean-Charles de Castelbajac, John Galliano, Jean Paul Gaultier, Marc Jacobs, Karl Lagerfeld, Alessandro Michele, Franco Moschino, Miuccia Prada, Richard Quinn, Yves Saint Laurent, Elsa Schiaparelli, Jeremy Scott, Anna Sui, Gianni Versace, and Vivienne Westwood. (shrink)

The relationship between Albert Einstein’s special theory of relativity and Hendrik A. Lorentz’s ether theory is best understood in terms of competing interpretations of Lorentz invariance. In the 1890s, Lorentz proved and exploited the Lorentz invariance of Maxwell’s equations, the laws governing electromagnetic fields in the ether, with what he called the theorem of corresponding states. To account for the negative results of attempts to detect the earth’s motion through the ether, Lorentz, in effect, had to assume that the laws (...) governing the matter interacting with the fields are Lorentz invariant as well. This additional assumption can be seen as a generalization of the well-known contraction hypothesis. In Lorentz’s theory, it remained an unexplained coincidence that both the laws governing fields and the laws governing matter should be Lorentz invariant. In special relativity, by contrast, the Lorentz invariance of all physical laws directly reflects the Minkowski space-time structure posited by the theory. One can use this observation to produce a common-cause argument to show that the relativistic interpretation of Lorentz invariance is preferable to Lorentz’s interpretation. (shrink)

Nous vivons dans un monde problématique, sans certitudes fixes. Désormais l’expérience est celle d’un flux héraclitéen. Nous sommes devenus des marins. Les intégristes voudraient jeter l’ancre en pleine tempête et les relativistes se laisser aller au fil du courant. La seule issue est d’apprivoiser le devenir dans un processus de problématisation, dont la démarche scientifique fournit le paradigme, processus qui articule doutes et certitudes sans remettre tout en question à chaque fois et qui permet des résultats provisoires certes mais suffisamment (...) assurés pour progresser. Il faut donc concevoir l’éducation comme problématisation. Ce qui implique de doter les jeunes de nouveaux types de repères : boussole et cartes avec lesquels ils pourront s’orienter eux-mêmes sur le fond d’un héritage, d’une expérience transmise. Une philosophie de l’éducation inspirée de la problématologie de John Dewey et de Michel Meyer, permet un autre regard sur l’évolution des normes éducatives, sur les schèmes qui les sous-tendent, sur le savoir et la culture scolaire, sur l’émancipation. (shrink)