Plotin, philosophe grec du IIIe siècle après J.-C., ayant vécu à Alexandrie et à Rome, offre au lecteur d'aujourd'hui un voyage merveilleux dans le monde "exotique" de la pensée antique. De quelle manière les Traités de Plotin invitent-ils le lecteur du XXIe siècle à adopter des catégories mentales qui lui sont "étrangères"? Et comment l'installent-ils ainsi "à l'extérieur" du monde moderne qu'il habite? N'est-ce pas à travers la richesse du champ sémantique des mots utilisés par les Ennéades, autorisant parfois des (...) associations étonnantes entre des concepts a priori inconciliables ou peu conciliables aux yeux de l'homme d'aujourd'hui, que résiderait notamment l'un des intérêts de la philosophie de Plotin? Les trois chapitres du présent ouvrage intitulés "Exégèse et originalité", "Existence et identité", "Logos et technê", illustrent ces types d'associations conceptuelles déroutantes, et pourtant souvent convaincantes. Lhomme moderne ne peut qu'être fasciné par l'argumentation des Ennéades montrant, pas à pas, les liens indéfectibles et stimulants rattachant par exemple "l'existence à l'identité", "le logos à la technê" ; de tels liens pouvant parfois conduire Plotin à dépasser la tradition dont il est issu et dont il se réclame pourtant. (shrink)

L'originalité de la philosophie de Platon et de Plotin est de situer l'origine de toutes choses dans un principe supérieur au monde physique et matériel. Cette décision philosophique, qui ne va pas de soi, visant à placer la cause de toutes choses dans un principe transcendant et immatériel, est concomitante d'un autre choix philosophique consistant à "séparer" la cause de son effet, le haut du bas, l'intelligible du sensible, l'invisible du visible, l'incorporel du corporel. De telles "séparations" poseront à Platon (...) et à Plotin le problème de l'unité du monde et des "relations" que ces deux niveaux différents peuvent ou doivent malgré tout entretenir afin d'éviter toute forme de dérive dualiste et de vision pessimiste du monde. Cet ouvrage propose d'affronter cette question épineuse et d'apprécier la pertinence de la solution qu'y apportent Platon et Plotin, en développant chacun une "philosophie de la relation" tout à fait originale et stimulante. (shrink)

Cette étude interroge et mesure la pertinence de la solution apportée par Plotin au problème métaphysique de la séparation (chôrismos) hérité de Platon. Les fonctions multiples attribuées par Plotin au Logos et aux logoi au sein de son système hiérarchisé, impliquant des niveaux différents de réalités, sont-elles en mesure de résoudre le problème de la séparation ontologique et cosmologique hérité du platonisme? Ne peut-on pas adresser à Plotin le reproche qu'il fait à ses adversaires gnostiques qui multiplient inutilement les hypostases (...) et les intermédiaires entre le monde intelligible et le monde sensible, et au sein même du monde intelligible? On se demandera également si la réduction de ces logoi multiples à un seul Logos n'apporterait pas une solution à ce problème de la séparation rencontré par Plotin? Le Christ-Médiateur, envisagé en tant que Logos par le Prologue de l'Evangile de Jean, n'est-il pas en d'autres termes en mesure de résoudre, à sa manière et différemment, ce problème de la séparation qui apparaît dans tout système philosophique et théologique induisant une forme de verticalité et de transcendance? En quoi le recours au Logos du Prologue est-il légitime historiquement et philosophiquement pour apporter une solution au problème du chôrismos rencontré par Plotin? Pourquoi Plotin ne fait-il pas mention du Logos johannique sachant que ce dernier offre pourtant des garanties d'unité et d'unicité, d'efficacité et de vitalité, de puissance de relation et de communication tant recherchée par le philosophe néoplatonicien ; et sachant que son disciple direct, Amélius, de l'école plotinienne à Rome, a lui-même eu le besoin de proposer une exégèse philosophique du Prologue? (shrink)

Quel est l'intérêt philosophique d'une réflexion sur le "bien" dans le Phédon de Platon, et sur les "origines de la crise" développée par Parménide d'Elée dans son Poème et Paul de Tarse dans sa Première Lettre aux Corinthiens? Il s'agira d'abord de voir comment le "bien" du Phédon de Platon est en mesure d'offrir, du haut de sa transcendance et d'une manière étonnante, une solution inédite au problème de la "séparation" (chôrismos) dans le but d'assurer la cohésion de l'univers, de (...) sauvegarder l'unité de l'homme et de fonder tout discours logique. Une telle étude aurait notamment pour résultat de remettre en cause l'idée reçue selon laquelle Platon développe une philosophie dualiste dans le Phédon. La deuxième partie de l'ouvrage propose de voir comment la "crise" (krisis) provoquée par le logos (raison) philosophique de Parménide d'Elée opère une critique des valeurs mondaines de son temps, et en quoi cette critique demeure valable pour l'homme d'aujourd'hui, afin d'examiner, par la suite, l'apport spécifique de Paul de Tarse au traitement de la "crise" corinthienne qu'il rencontre et qu'il tente de résoudre à partir de son logos (langage) spirituel, tout aussi critique que celui de la philosophie. Peut-on soutenir que ce logos est également en mesure de servir, aujourd'hui, de garde-fou salutaire à toute forme de débordement et d'excès? De quels excès s'agit-il? De quelles façons chacun de ces deux types de logos philosophique et spirituel procure-t-il à l'homme un sens du discernement nécessaire à sa vie? Telles sont certaines des questions auxquelles le présent ouvrage tente de répondre. (shrink)

Le logos en tant que "discours" n'est-il pas l'instrument par excellence du philosophe? Cette mise en relation des hommes avec les Idées et avec la vérité permet à Platon de lever certaines difficultés propres à son système et de résoudre un problème métaphysique. Quant au logos de Plotin il occupe une position négligeable du fait de son incapacité à exprimer l'Un. Or, le lecteur réalisera que Plotin développe, contrairement à ce que soutient l'opinion commune, une philosophie du langage considérable et (...) fort utile. (shrink)

Si bien Parménides no otorga, como Jenófanes, una connotación fuertemente negativa al discurso mítico de la tradición poética, no es menos cierto que asistimos con él a una verdadera transmutación del discurso homérico y hesiódico, fundamentalmente en lo que concierne al problema complejo de la verdad, el engaño y la verosimilitud. La originalidad filosófica de Parménides consistiría no solamente en la elaboración de un logos que encarnaría por primera vez en Occidente la idea de una “razón crítica personal”, capaz de (...) “juzgar” la refutación enunciada por la autoridad de una “maestra de la verdad”, y en el establecimiento de un gnōmē (juicio) susceptible de elegir entre lo más verosímil y lo menos verosímil, sino también en el hecho de entablar, mucho antes que Platón –y a diferencia del Sofista–, una reflexión sobre la verdad y el error que está guiada por la cuestión de las buenas y malas mezclas, las buenas y malas separaciones.---“Mythos and logos in Parmenides”. Although Parmenides does not present a strongly negative connotation of the mythical discourse of the poetic tradition, as Xenophanes does, there is no less truth to the fact that we witness with him a true transmutation of the Homeric and Hesiodic discourse, especially regarding the complex problem of truth, deceit and verisimilitude. The philosophical originality of Parmenides lies not only in the elaboration of a logos that would, for the first time in Western Thought, embody the idea of a “personal critical reason”, capable of “judging” the refutation pronounced by the authority of a “Master of Truth”, nor in the institution of a gnōmē (judgement) capable of choosing between things with more or less verisimilitude, but also in the fact of undertaking, long before Plato –and in a different manner than in the Sophist–, a reflection on truth and error that is guided by the question of the good and bad combinations, the good and bad separations. (shrink)

Dans cette étude consacrée à Platon et Plotin, il s'agit de mettre au jour toute l'originalité de la pensée de Platon et de Plotin face au problème de la séparation à travers l'analyse précises de certains dialogues de Platon et de Traités significatifs de Plotin.

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:The Journal of Aesthetic Education 38.3 (2004) 107-115 [Access article in PDF] The Search for Narrative Laura Felleman Fattal The most cursory cultural investigator cannot help but notice that the visual arts have become a significant source and impetus for the narrative of contemporary books, theater, and dance. In recent memory, the following theatrical and dance performances "Contact" by Susan Stroman and John Weidman, "Art" by Yasmina Reza, (...) "Sunday in the Park with George" by Stephen Sondheim, book by James Lapine, "Les Miserables" by Claude-Michel Schfonberg/music and others, "Picasso at the Lapin Agile" by Steve Martin, and "The Sleep of Reason," by Antonio Buero-Vallego have taken the not-so-dead-life (natura morta) or still life of painting into the vital arena of the performing arts. The quest to seek intra-discipline aesthetics among dance, music, theater, and the visual arts is not the charge, but instead a turn to establish a narrative that has brought about this invasion of interactivity between the arts. Clearly defined boundaries between the arts have beenfading since Fluxus, Happenings, and Performance Art for over half a century. In the early part of the twentieth century, Marcel Duchamp's chess games and use of the fourth dimension of time in his numerous produced and pondered pieces all speak to the interrelatedness of the arts.Contemporary novels based on historical themes and subjects have created characters based on the lives and works of famous and intriguing artists such as Michelangelo Caravaggio, Georges de La Tour, and Jan Vermeer. The silence and pensive qualities of the figures of Jan Vermeer, the seventeenth-century Dutch painter, have been the catalyst for two books, The Girl in Hyacinth Blue by Susan Vreeland and the Girl with the Pearl Earring by Tracy Chevalier.1 Vreeland combines the mystic of the Vermeer paintings' characters with the impoverished history of the refugee status of its owners. In various parts of Vreeland's book the authenticity of the Vermeer painting becomes a subtext for describing the work. [End Page 107] Just the lament of some Dutch art historians. Where has such a treasure gone, or some such thing? He turned to pour us both a brandy. So why could this not be? It's his same window opening inward at the left that he has used so often, the same splash of pale yellow light. Take a look at the figures in the tapestry on the table. Same as in nine other paintings. Same Spanish chair with lion's head finials that he used in eleven canvases, same brass studs in the leather. Same black and white tiles placed diagonally on the floor.2A few pages later the interest in the authenticity of the painting continues: No, no signature. But that was not unusual. He often failed to sign his work. Besides, he had at least seven styles of signature. For Vermeer, signatures are not definite evidence. Technique is. Look at the direction of the brush's stroke, those tiny grooves of the brush hairs. They have their lighted and their shaded side. Look elsewhere. You'll find overlapping layers of paint no thicker than silk thread that give a minute difference in shade. That's what makes it a Vermeer.3In Girl with a Pearl Earring, Vermeer's slow and meticulous technique, obsessive involvement with his models and his assiduous composition of light over textures of both animate and inanimate surfaces in the painting become the core of the novel. He had come in and was standing in the studio, looking out a window. "Take a seat, please, Greit," he said, his back to me.I sat in the chair by the harpsichord. I did not touch it — I had never touched an instrument except to clean it. As I waited I studied the paintings he had hung on the back wall that would form part of the concert painting. There was a landscape on the left, and on the right a picture of three people — a woman playing a lute, wearing a dress that revealed much of... (shrink)

Beginning with the view that human consciousness is essentially embodied and that the way we consciously experience the world is structured by our bodily dynamics and surroundings, the book argues that emotions are a fundamental manifestation of our embodiment, and play a crucial role in self-consciousness, moral evaluation, and social cognition.

There is a tendency to take mounted dinosaur skeletons at face value, as the raw data on which the science of paleontology is founded. But the truth is that mounted dinosaur skeletons are substantially intention-dependent—they are artifacts. More importantly, I argue, they are also substantially imagination-dependent: their production is substantially causally reliant on preparators’ creative imaginations, and their proper reception is predicated on audiences’ recreative imaginations. My main goal here is to show that dinosaur skeletal mounts are plausible candidates for (...) art-status. But, what is more, I think they are artworks—specifically, sculptures. (shrink)

Translator's preface -- Introduction: The question of phenomenology -- Hyletic phenomenology and material phenomenology -- The phenomenological method -- Pathos-with reflections on Husserl's Fifth cartesian meditation -- For a phenomenology of community.

Philosophical suspicions about the place of shame in the psychology of the mature moral agent are in tension with the commonplace assumption that to call a person shameless purports to mark a fault, arguably a moral fault. I shift philosophical suspicions away from shame and toward its absence in the shameless by focusing attention on phenomena of shamelessness. In redirecting our attention, I clarify the nature of the failing to which ascriptions of shamelessness might refer and defend the thought that, (...) as an evasion of moral self-censure, shamelessness can be morally pernicious. Far from foregoing shame, I conclude, we should be mindful of its moral importance and unapologetic in its defense. (shrink)

Ce livre de Michel Freitag interpelle "tous ceux qui s'interrogent sur la place qu'ils tiennent ou le rôle qu'ils jouent dans l'aventure de l'Université contemporaine." (Georges Leroux, Spirale) Une des constantes des écrits contenus dans ce livre "réside dans la comparaison systématique que Michel Freitag établit entre les caractéristiques de la modernité et celles de la postmodernité et les conséquences de celle-ci sur le traitement des enjeux et des problèmes actuels." (Louis Guay, Anthropologie et société) "Dans une société (...) réduite au bavardage, à l'insignifiance, à la poursuite de petits bonheurs mesquins, le tout sous contrôle bureaucratique de plus en plus envahissant, une telle réflexion est devenue essentielle. Voici un livre de bonne foi qui n'attend que ses lecteurs, qu'on souhaite nombreux." (Robert Major, Voix et images). (shrink)

This paper provides an overview of the history of the notion of essence in 20th century analytic philosophy, focusing on views held by influential analytic philosophers who discussed, or relied on essence or cognate notions in their works. It in particular covers Russell and Moore’s different approaches to essence before and after breaking with British idealism, the (pre- and post-)logical positivists’ critique of metaphysics and rejection of essence (Wittgenstein, Carnap, Schlick, Stebbing), the tendency to loosen the notion of logical necessity (...) to accommodate certain metaphysical truths in Wittgenstein and others, Quine’s logical rehabilitation of metaphysics and criticism of de re modality, the modal view of essence promoted by the development of quantified modal logic (C. I. Lewis, Barcan Marcus, Kripke) and direct reference theory (Barcan Marcus, Kripke, Putnam), and the emergence of the notion of metaphysical necessity (Kneale, Kripke), and finally Fine’s re-establishment of a Neo-Aristotelian, hyperintensional notion of essence in contemporary metaphysics. (shrink)

Philosophers disagree about what the folk concept of pain is. This paper criticises existing theories of the folk concept of pain, i.e. the mental view, the bodily view, and the recently proposed polyeidic view. It puts forward an alternative proposal – the polysemy view – according to which pain terms like “sore,” “ache” and “hurt” are polysemous, where one sense refers to a mental state and another a bodily state, and the type of polysemy at issue reflects two distinct but (...) related concepts of pain. Implications with respect to issues in philosophy of pain are also drawn. (shrink)

« Qu’est-ce que la philosophie et quel est son rôle aujourd’hui? Entre juillet et octobre 1966, quelques mois après la parution des Mots et les Choses, Michel Foucault, dans un manuscrit très soigneusement rédigé mais qu’il ne publiera pas, apporte sa réponse à cette question tant débattue.À la différence de ceux qui, à l’époque, s’attachent à dévoiler l’essence de la philosophie ou à en prononcer la mort, Foucault l’appréhende, dans sa matérialité, comme un discours dont il convient de dégager (...) l’économie eu égard aux autres discours (scientifique, fictif, ordinaire, religieux) qui circulent dans un contexte donné.Le Discours philosophique propose ainsi une nouvelle manière de faire l’histoire de la philosophie, qui la décentre du commentaire des grands philosophes. Nietzsche y occupe toutefois une place particulière car il inaugure une conjoncture où la philosophie devient une entreprise de diagnostic du présent. Il revient en effet désormais à la philosophie de dire, à partir de l’« archive intégrale » d’une culture, ce qui en fait l’actualité.Si L’Archéologie du savoir, consacré aux enjeux méthodologiques d’un tel projet, s’y annonce, nulle part autant que dans Le Discours philosophique Michel Foucault n’aura explicité les ambitions de son programme intellectuel.»--. (shrink)

The first collection of twentieth-century French philosopher Michel Henry's work in English, this book provides an excellent introduction to his thought.

Because of their range, brilliance, and singularity, the ideas of the philosopher-critic-historian Michel Foucault have gained extraordinary currency throughout the Western intellectual community. This book offers a selection of seven of Foucault's most important published essays, translated from the French, with an introductory essay and notes by Donald F. Bouchard. Also included are a summary of a course given by Foucault at College de France; the transcript of a conversation between Foucault and Gilles Deleuze; and an interview with Foucault (...) that appeared in the journal Actuel. Professor Bouchard has divided the book into three closely related sections. The four essays in Part One examine language as a "perilous limit" of what we know and what we are. The essays in the second part suggest the methodological guidelines to which Foucault subscribes, and they record, in the editor's words, "the penetration of the language of literature into the domain of discursive thought." The material in the last section is more obviously political than the essays. It treats language in use, language attempting to impart knowledge and power. Translated by the editor and Sherry Simon into fluent and lucid English, these essays will appeal primarily to students of literature, especially those interested in contemporary continental structuralist criticism. But because of the breadth of Foucault's interests, they should also prove valuable to anthropologists, linguists, sociologists, and psychologists. (shrink)

Si l’on connaît aujourd’hui le dialogue fructueux que Paul Ricœur a noué avec les penseurs structuralistes, on ignore largement son positionnement face à la mouvance poststructuraliste. Faut-il opposer la philosophie de Ricœur au poststructuralisme à la française ou au contraire doit-on montrer qu’elle en est une variante singulière? C’est la seconde option qui est ici défendue. Certes, le poststructuralisme ne doit pas être considéré comme une école de pensée mais comme une reconstruction qui relève de l’histoire de la philosophie. Dans (...) la mesure où les horizons de dépassement du structuralisme ont été posés de manière chaque fois particulière, il est préférable de parler de poststructuralismes au pluriel. C’est la raison pour laquelle J. Michel propose des confrontations dyadiques entre Ricœur et certains de ses contemporains que l’on regroupe habituellement dans cette mouvance. (shrink)

This paper addresses a largely neglected question in ongoing debates over disagreement: what is the relation, if any, between disagreements involving credences and disagreements involving outright beliefs? The first part of the paper offers some desiderata for an adequate account of credal and full disagreement. The second part of the paper argues that both phenomena can be subsumed under a schematic definition which goes as follows: A and B disagree if and only if the accuracy conditions of A's doxastic attitude (...) are such that, if they were fulfilled, this would ipso facto make B's doxastic attitude inaccurate, or vice-versa. (shrink)

This chapter contains section titled: From “Truth and Power”.

The course given by Michel Foucault from February to March 1984, under the title 'The Courage of Truth', was his last at the Collège de France. His death shortly after, on June 25th, tempts us to detect a philosophical testament in these lectures, especially in view of the prominence they give to the theme of death, notably through a reinterpretation of Socrates' last words--'Crito, we owe a cock to Asclepius'--which, with Georges Dumézil, Foucault understands as the expression of a (...) profound gratitude towards philosophy for its cure of the only serious illness: that of false opinions and prejudices. These lectures continue and radicalize the analyses of those of the previous year. Foucault's 1983 lectures investigated the function of 'truth telling' in politics in order to establish courage and conviction as ethical conditions for democracy irreducible to the formal rules of consensus. With the Cynics, this manifestation of the truth no longer appears simply as a risky speaking out, but in the very substance of existence. In fact, Foucault offers an incisive study of ancient Cynicism as practical philsophy, athleticism of the truth, public provocation, and ascetic sovereignty. The scandal of the true life is constructed in oppositon to Platonism and its world of transcendent intelligible forms"--Publisher's description, p. [2] of dust jacket. (shrink)

This article explains how strong sustainability ethics has emerged and developed as a new field over the last two decades as a critical response to influential conceptions of weak sustainability. It investigates three competing, normative approaches to strong sustainability: the communitarian approach, the Rawlsian approach, and the capabilities approach. Although these approaches converge around the idea that there are critical, non-substitutable natural resources and services, they diverge on how to reconcile human development and environmental protection. The aim of the paper (...) is to provide a critical overview of these three perspectives, but also and mostly to show that when we put them into dialogue with each other, we can clarify the demands of sustainability. The paper concludes that the capabilities approach is the most suitable way to think about sustainability, but only if it goes beyond its dominantly anthropocentric view. (shrink)

Les entretiens ici réunis portent sur les conséquences de cette révolution méthodologique qui permet la compréhension des grands aspects de l'existence, thème de nombreux essais de Michel Henry à partir des années 80 : action, ...

As part of recent epistemic challenges to democracy, some have endorsed the implementation of epistemic constraints on voting, institutional mechanisms that bar incompetent voters from participating in public decision-making procedures. This proposal is often considered incompatible with a commitment to political equality. In this paper, I aim to dispute the strength of this latter claim by offering a theoretical justification for epistemic constraints on voting that does not rest on antiegalitarian commitments. Call this the civic accountability justification for epistemic constraints (...) on voting. On this view, voters stand to one another in a normative relation of reciprocal accountability that requires them to uphold an epistemically responsible conduct. Modest epistemic constraints on voting are justifiable because they secure that participation in voting is conforming to this normative requirement. Thanks to its distinctive features, the civic accountability justification can overcome two problems that egalitarians commonly associate with the idea of epistemic constraints on voting: the disrespect problem and the hierarchy problem. (shrink)

A recent paper by Bullock (2018) raises a dilemma for proponents of epistemic paternalism. If epistemic paternalists contend that epistemic improvements contribute to one’s wellbeing, then their view conflates with general paternalism. Instead, if they appeal to the notion of a distinctive epistemic value, their view is unjustified, in that concerns about epistemic value fail to outweigh concerns about personal sovereignty. In this chapter, I address Bullock’s challenge in a way that safeguards the legitimacy of epistemic paternalism, albeit restricting its (...) scope to a limited range of cognitive projects. After shedding light on a problem with how Bullock singles out cases to which the dilemma applies, I argue that there is at least one reasonable way of interpreting the notion of ‘personal autonomy’ which legitimates and justifies undertaking epistemically paternalistic interferences for one’s epistemic good. (shrink)

This paper draws on the emerging field of innovation ethics to complement the more established field of responsible innovation by focusing on key ethical issues raised by technological innovations. One key limitation of influential frameworks of RI is that they tend to neglect some key ethical issues raised by innovation, as well as major normative dimensions of the notion of responsibility. We explain how IE could enrich RI by stressing the more important role that ethical analysis should play in RI. (...) We focus on two transversal issues of IE: the issue of redrawing conceptual boundaries, especially the topic of the artificialization of the world, and the issue of responsibility, especially the notion of total responsibility. We address these two issues from the thematic perspective of IE, thereby generating lessons learnt for RI. These two examples are taken as illustrations and blueprint of the dialogue that should take place between the two fields. (shrink)