This book is an introduction to and translation of the 1938 Walter Lippmann Colloquium held in Paris, which became known as the intellectual birthplace of “neo-liberalism.” Although the Lippmann Colloquium has been the subject of significant recent interest, this book makes this crucial primary source available to a wide, English-speaking audience for the first time. The Colloquium features important—often passionate—debates involving well-known intellectual figures such as Walter Lippmann, Louis Rougier, Friedrich Hayek, Ludwig von Mises, Michael Polanyi, Jacques Rueff, Alexander Rüstow (...) and Wilhelm Röpke. Many of the topics addressed at the Colloquium, such as the proper methods of economic intervention, the relationship between the market economy and democracy, and the relationship between economic liberalism and political liberalism are issues that still vie for our attention in the aftermath of the Great Recession. (shrink)

J’espère que tout cela sera le point de départ d’une collaboration efficace dans l’avenir, et que je me permets de souhaiter, en outre, amicale.Louis Rougier à Hans Reichenbach, 24 novembre 1931.

1 – Introduction Le manuscrit De Torricelli à Pascal est un manuscrit que, pour des raisons que nous ignorons, Louis Rougier a renoncé ou a dû renoncer à publier, faute peut-être d’éditeur. Retrouvé par Denis Lelarge dans le fonds Rougier conservé à Lourmarin, la revue Philosophia Scientiæ a choisi d’en assurer la publication, trente ans ou presque après la mort de son auteur. Pourquoi ce choix? Quel intérêt présente ce manuscrit? Cet intérêt est triple. À commencer par le plus mani...

The question of the political potential possessed by the philosophies of the Vienna Circle is complex for more than one reason. It is so partly due to the politically heterogeneous membership of the Circle, partly due to the difficult if not extreme political circumstances under which they had to operate, and partly due to the variable meanings of the parameter "political," some of which are and some of which are not compatible with, in turn, variable versions of the doctrine of (...) the value-neutrality of science. For instance, philosophies of science may steadfastly be standing guard against pseudo-scientific nonsense being paraded as worthy of credence in public discourse, this concern for intellectual hygene... (shrink)

In 1980, Pierre Jacob1 published a book about the itinerary of logical positivism from Vienna to Cambridge , a story of the migration and of the effects of logical positivism in America since the fifties. Christiane Chauviré 2 took the other way round in a paper about the early influence of Peirce’s pragmatism on the Vienna Circle . We are also aware of the importance of logical positivism in England. Sir Alfred Ayer brought it back to England after having met, (...) on Ryle’s recommendation, Moritz Schlick in Vienna in 1932. Gilbert Ryle was Ayer’s tutor in Oxford. The meeting between the two of them took place two years after the International Congress of Philosophy in Oxford . It was on this occasion that Gilbert Ryle, who opened the congress, met Schlick for the first time. In his autobiographical sketch,3 he mentions the impact of the Viennese philosophy on his own philosophical development in the early thirties. This attests to the Vienna/Cambridge /Oxford triangle. (shrink)

In 1929 Moritz Schlick and those scholars he had brought together came to realize that they had given rise to something entirely new, so the text of the Vienna Circle Manifesto has it. What was novel was the conception of the world, henceforth scientific. Or as we may put it otherwise: a discipline had been established, the philosophy of science, that is a reflection on science no longer subordinate to traditional theory of knowledge and metaphysics. The text goes on to (...) explain why such a conception arose geographically where it did: “That Vienna was specially suitable ground for [the development of the spirit of a scientific conception of the world] is historically understandable” 1. The Vienna Circle Manifesto proceeds to enumerate the multifarious intellectual movements that were brought together at the beginning of the 20th century in the city of Vienna. Is it irrelevant or untimely to emphasize this cosmopolitan spirit? I believe, on the contrary, that cosmopolitanism provides both a lesson about philosophical creativity and a key for understanding the vitality of Viennese philosophy: the achievements of the Vienna Circle were the result of an exceptional open-mindedness on the part of its members. (shrink)

Quelle conception de la science proposer aujourd'hui? Les grandes doctrines du XXe siècle se sont heurtées successivement à des difficultés, que ce soit le positivisme du Cercle de Vienne ou le rationalisme critique de Popper. Même la perspective historique inspirée par Bachelard et par Kuhn a donné lieu à des versions disparates. Pourtant, toutes ces tentatives partent d'un même constat : l'échec de la vision classique de la science et la nécessité d'un nouveau discours. On peut en retracer l'histoire. Face (...) à la pluralité des hypothèses possibles au sujet de l'espace, du temps et de la matière, Poincaré pose l'existence de conventions, ou mieux de libres décisions, au cœur de la science. Ainsi, dès la fin du XIXe siècle, il coupe court aux projets traditionnels de fondation : ni le synthétique a priori de Kant, ni les faits généraux de Comte ne sauraient expliquer la nature de l'activité scientifique. C'est la naissance d'un mouvement d'idées, le conventionnalisme, quia eu un impact décisif sur la philosophie viennoise et, à travers elle, sur la philosophie mondiale. Voilà un fil conducteur pour évaluer un siècle de débats. Que signifie donc libre décision en matière scientifique? On affirme la dimension historique irréductible de notre savoir ; on reconnaît la créativité et la responsabilité inhérentes à la science en tant qu'aventure humaine. (shrink)

This intriguing and ground-breaking book is the first in-depth study of the development of philosophy of science in the United States during the Cold War. It documents the political vitality of logical empiricism and Otto Neurath's Unity of Science Movement when these projects emigrated to the US in the 1930s and follows their de-politicization by a convergence of intellectual, cultural and political forces in the 1950s. Students of logical empiricism and the Vienna Circle treat these as strictly intellectual non-political projects. (...) In fact, the refugee philosophers of science were highly active politically and debated questions about values inside and outside science, as a result of which their philosophy of science was scrutinized politically both from within and without the profession, by such institutions as J. Edgar Hoover's FBI. It will prove absorbing reading to philosophers and historians of science, intellectual historians, and scholars of Cold War studies. (shrink)