"Nous sommes en guerre", déclare au soir du 13 novembre 2015 le président de la République. Mais quelle est cette guerre au juste? La contre-histoire du capitalisme que nous proposons ici vise à recouvrer la réalité des guerres qui nous sont infligées et déniées : non pas la guerre idéale des philosophes, mais les guerres de classe, de race, de sexe ou de genre, les guerres de civilisation et environnementales, les guerres de subjectivité qui font rage au sein des populations (...) et constituent le moteur secret de la gouvern731933ementalité libérale. En nommant l'ennemi (le réfugié, le migrant, le musulman), les nouveaux fascismes établissent leur hégémonie sur les processus de subjectivation politique réduits à des mots d'ordre racistes, sexistes, xénophobes qui attisent la guerre entre les pauvres et entretiennent la philosophie de guerre totale du néolibéralisme. Parce que la guerre et le fascisme sont le refoulé de la pensée post-68, nous n'avons pas seulement lu l'histoire du capital à travers la guerre, mais également cette dernière à travers l'étrange révolution de 68 qui seule rend possible le passage de la guerre aux lierres - et de celles-ci à la construction de nouvelles machines de guerre contre la financiarisation contemporaine. Il s'agit donc de pousser la "pensée 68" au-delà de ses propres limites et de la réorienter vers une nouvelle pragmatique des luttes, en prise sur la guerre continuée du Capital. C'est dire qu'il s'agit surtout de nous préparer à ces batailles que nous devons mener si nous ne voulons pas être toujours vaincus."--Page 4 of cover. (shrink)
Depuis 1960, Paul Ricœur est le principal représentant de la philosophie herméneutique en France. Cet ouvrage, qui forme le troisième volet d'un triptyque dédié aux différentes expressions que l'idée de phénoménologie herméneutique a reçues dans la philosophie du XXe siècle, se donne pour tâche d'analyser et d'évaluer la contribution de Ricœur à ce courant. Il se focalise d'abord sur la percée herméneutique de 1960, qui a pour arrière-plan une phénoménologie du volontaire de l'involontaire et une anthropologie de la faillibilité. La (...) seconde partie, placée sous l'égide du " Cogito narratif ", retrace la genèse d'une herméneutique de la conscience historique sous le fil conducteur d'une analyse des opérations de mise en intrigue narrative dans le récit de fiction et le récit historique. La troisième partie dégage les principaux phénomènes qui étayent l'idée d'une phénoménologie du " sujet capable " qui domine les derniers travaux de Ricœur. Qu'il s'agisse de la capacité de se souvenir, d'oublier, de pardonner, de promettre ou de témoigner, ces recherches donnent tout son relief à la question kantienne : " Que m'est-il permis d'espérer? ". (shrink)
The purpose of this study is to propose the structural outline and conceptual framework of a Ricœurian translation theory. Following a discussion on the ambiguities around situating Ricœur in translation theory, three major interlinked components of the theory are explored. First, the metaphysics of meaning and translation is established based on Ricœur’s hermeneutics of infinitude. Then, the language-processing component is constructed through an incorporation of Ricœur’s narrative theory. Finally, the ethics and politics of translation, particularly in globalization, are founded based (...) on Ricœur’s “age of hermeneutics theory.”. (shrink)
The essay’s argument is twofold: First, it contends that Ricœur’s articulation of the social imaginary in the Lectures on Ideology and Utopia, reveals a turn to a general theory of culture, which is best understood as a shift from a hermeneutics of culture to a cultural hermeneutics. This move forms part of his philosophical anthropology of “real social life.” The essay proposes it is epitomized in Ricœur’s changing reception of Cassirer. Second, the essay hermeneutically reconstructs the emergence of this turn (...) in Ricœur’s intellectual trajectory, and, in so doing, contends that it is connected to a rearticulation of both the phenomenological reduction and the symbolic function that took place in the mid- to late 1960s. Ricœur’s developing response to the phenomenological problematic of the world horizon underlies these further phenomenological-hermeneutic considerations. The essay concludes with a brief sketch of Ricœur’s understanding of the symbolic mediation of action as a reconfiguration of the hermeneutical actualization of phenomenological preconditions of the symbolic. (shrink)
This article analyses Guattari's and Latour's bodies of work as radical developers of a processual and ontological transdisciplinarity. These works impose a definitive break from the history that, in the 1960s, had drawn upon structuralism in order to oppose philosophy with an epistemological revolution from the perspective of a scientific problematization and first transdisciplinary reconfiguration of the sciences de l'homme. It is shown that the second anti-structuralist transdisciplinarity affirms as its raison dêtre "the necessity to return to Pragmatics", to enact (...) the new significance of the transversal constructions liberated by the rhizomatic monism of a hybrid social ontology. Between Guattari, Latour, and the ecologization they share, a total de-epistemologization and re-ontologization is engaged. It leads to the fall of the 'Ontological Iron Curtain' erected by the philosophical tradition between mind and matter, nature and society. The article concludes by critically addressing the final statements of both Guattari and Latour towards a new aesthetic paradigm and a new diplomacy of institutional forms respectively. (shrink)
The analysis of fundamental texts such as “Architecture and Narrativity” and Memory, History, Forgetting aims to fill a gap in studies of Environmental Hermeneutics. Indeed, the analogy between space and narrative, through parallelism with the process of triple mimesis, is usually deduced by environmental hermeneuticists from the works Time and Narrative and Oneself as Another. However, Ricœur himself took it upon himself to make this transposition in a direct and elaborated way from a phenomenological and hermeneutic analysis of the built (...) space and the inhabited space, opening the way for a broader and more grounded epistemology of environmental hermeneutics. The introduction of the critical concept of landscape, as seen today by constructivist and cultural geography, legitimizes the claims of an environmental hermeneutics as an interpretive process of formally non-textual objects. Indeed, landscape in its connection to territory has its own semiotic and semantic character, which is appealed to for reading and interpretation. (shrink)
Paul Ricœur laisse comme testament une œuvre immense.Elle est justement saluée aujourd'hui pour s'être confrontée aux principaux enjeux intellectuels du XXe siècle, sans jamais cesser de dialoguer pour autant avec le "grand livre de la philosophie". A travers la diversité des thématiques abordées par le philosophe, cet ouvrage nous éclaire sur ce qui fait la trame et le moteur de cette pensée en mouvement : une réflexion sur l'homme en tant qu'être agissant.L'auteur propose de reconfigurer le parcours de cette philosophie (...) de l'agir humain en suivant trois perspectives à la fois distinctes et complémentaires. Selon une première perspective, il s'agit de retracer la genèse d'une anthropologie philosophique qui porte sur les fondamentaux de l'agir humain. Selon une deuxième perspective, l'auteur cherche à resituer l'épistémologie de Paul Ricœur, ressourcée dans la tradition herméneutique, au contact des sciences de l'homme.Selon une troisième perspective, il s'agit de reconstituer les jalons d'une philosophie normative qui ouvre la morale, le politique, la justice et le droit à l'horizon de l'universalité, sans dénier l'incarnation de l'agir humain dans un "monde de la vie" déjà structuré par des valeurs. A l'opposé d'une rhétorique hagiographique ou d'une critique systématique, la "juste distance" prise par l'auteur permet de restituer l'unité profonde de l'œuvre ricoeurienne et d'en dévoiler en même temps les tensions et les paradoxes.Cet ouvrage accorde une large place à la réception philosophique du travail de Paul Ricœur sur l'agir humain en le présentant comme une "œuvre ouverte", élevée au "conflit des interprétations". C'est dire qu'après la mort du penseur, sa pensée ne fait que commencer, que renaître dans l'esprit de chaque nouveau lecteur. (shrink)
Although Paul Ricœur never wrote a book on acting and suffering, the essay focuses on Ricœur’s engagement with this topic. It was one of Ricœur’s abiding interests that consistently appeared over the years in a number of his works. Given his compassionate affirmation of life in this world, he was vitally concerned about human beings’ inhumanity, in the form of inflicting unmerited suffering on their fellow beings. His distress on this issue was clearly evident. This essay is an overview of (...) Ricœur’s endeavors to try and alleviate such injustice by a commitment to an ethically grounded approach that aimed at “the good life with and for others, in just institutions.”. (shrink)
Les commentateurs s’accordent pour constater une évolution dans la pensée politique de Ricœur conduisant d’un radicalisme à un réformisme. Par-delà ces variations, on se propose plutôt de mettre en évidence la continuité d’un projet. Non seulement la critique du capitalisme se poursuit jusqu’au bout, mais la perspective du socialisme semble très tôt tenue pour improbable. Dans les deux cas, la préoccupation centrale porte sur la nécessité de raviver les traditions et de faire émerger l’élan initial sous la doctrine “ossifiée ” (...) en les situant en tension critique entre elles pour qu’elles se corrigent mutuellement. Le projet politique de Ricœur consiste à établir en vis-à-vis libéralisme et socialisme. (shrink)
This article situates The Course of Recognition in the context of Ricœurian philosophy and contemporary debates on mutual recognition. This article reconstructs the debate between Ricœur and mainstream recognition scholars, as well as with the other figures, such as Boltanski, Thévenot and Hénaff, who had a direct influence in the way Ricœur fleshed out his alternative conception of recognition. By connecting recognition with Ricœur’s notions of ideology and utopia, we are able to uncover a major blind spot in the standard (...) model of recognition,and to undo ideological and reified forms of recognition. Honneth and Ricœur both aim at societies whose members are duly recognized, but they do so in radically different manners. Whereas Honneth’s model must be politicized in order to become relevant to social change, Ricœur evisages social change in a pure ethics of recognition. (shrink)
Resistance to inhibitors of cholinesterase 8A (Ric-8A) is a prominent non-receptor GEF and a chaperone of G protein α-subunits (Gα). Recent studies shed light on the structure of Ric-8A, providing insights into the mechanisms underlying its interaction with Gα. Ric-8A is composed of a core armadillo-like domain and a flexible C-terminal tail. Interaction of a conserved concave surface of its core domain with the Gα C-terminus appears to mediate formation of the initial Ric-8A/GαGDP intermediate, followed by the formation of a (...) stable nucleotide-free complex. The latter event involves a large-scale dislocation of the Gα α5-helix that produces an extensive primary interface and disrupts the nucleotide-binding site of Gα. The distal portion of the C-terminal tail of Ric-8A forms a smaller secondary interface, which ostensibly binds the switch II region of Gα, facilitating binding of GTP. The two-site Gα interface of Ric-8A is distinct from that of GPCRs, and might have evolved to support the chaperone function of Ric-8A. (shrink)
Este trabalho tem como objetivo principal promover o diálogo entre Paul Ricœur e Jacques Derrida no que concerne às abordagens que estes dois autores fazem da noção de perdão. A partir disso, discute-se primeiramente a ideia do perdão difícil em Ricœur e, num segundo momento, aquela do perdão im-possível em Derrida. Ainda que falem a partir de posições de fala diferentes, segundo idiomas filosóficos distintos, sustenta-se que a confrontação de ambas as perspectivas nos dá a pensar o perdão de outro (...) modo, segundo a necessidade e a iminência do trato dessa questão em nossos dias. (shrink)
In Oneself as Another, Ricœur famously writes of the ethical intention as “aiming at the ‘good life’ with and for others, in just institutions.” This article explores the potential meaning of “just institutions,” a theme underdeveloped in Ricœur’s work. While many have argued that institutions necessarily reify and so cannot aim toward just ends, the article draws on Ricœur’s differentiation between objectification and reification to show why this need not be the case. While reification destroys human value and meaning because (...) it reduces human activity to a thing, objectification characterizes the positive externalization of ourselves in objects—in words, deeds, structures, and institutions. Institutions such as the law are structures that can positively objectify our just aspirations, even if we must continually guard against these structures’ reified reduction. Ricœur shows us how objectification, including objectification of values in institutions, can be something not only positive but necessary in order for values to flourish. (shrink)
Ce texte s’inscrit dans le prolongement d’un effort endurci pour penser les modalités complexes du dialogue entre la psychanalyse lacanienne et la phénoménologie française dans la seconde moitié du xx e siècle. Plus exactement, il s’agit ici d’indiquer les raisons objectives, à la fois théoriques et pratiques, qui expliquent la violence de la réception française du De l’interprétation de Paul Ricœur, en mettant en perspective les positions respectives du philosophe et celles du psychanalyste Jacques Lacan lors du colloque de Bonneval (...) sur l’Inconscient d’octobre 1960. L’analyse détaillée du texte “Le conscient et l’inconscient” – élément du corpus ricœurien trop souvent négligé – au regard de l’enseignement lacanien du tournant des années 1960 doit en outre permettre de dégager deux théories de l’interprétation antagonistes, afin d’indiquer pour finir les points concrets de divergence entre les orientations “ricœurienne” et “lacanienne” de la clinique psychanalytique. (shrink)
“Moi, les collectifs, les proches”: Ricœur désigne par-là les sujets d’attribution du souvenir pour clore le parcours de la première partie de son œuvre, La mémoire, l’histoire, l’oubli, publiée en 2000. Ricœur, lecteur des sciences sociales, évoque dans ce chapitre le travail d’Alfred Schütz et la sociologie phénoménologique. L’exploration d’un plan intermédiaire de la mémoire dans la relation aux proches sera l’occasion d’un détour herméneutique vers ce lien social de la proximité. “Sur quel trajet d’attribution de la mémoire se situent (...) les proches?” se demande Ricœur. C’est dans un dialogue instructif avec Schütz que nous tenterons de poser des jalons. En effet, les proches sont l’occasion de penser la reconnaissance par le chemin du souvenir. Dans cette exploration de l’attribution des souvenirs s’ouvre la connexion de la mémoire à la reconnaissance à une échelle particulière du lien social, celle de la proximité. (shrink)
Résumé Le but de cet article est de mettre en dialogue Ricœur avec la théorie sociale d’Anthony Giddens, plus spécifiquement l’herméneutique de l’homme capable avec la théorie de la structuration. Nous commencerons par explorer quelques termes clefs permettant de comparer les deux auteurs au sujet du rapport entre acteurs et systèmes. Chez Ricœur, nous commenterons les notions d’institution et de pratique; chez Giddens, des notions importantes pour présenter la “dualité de structure.” Au cours de cette exploration, quatre tâches seront identifiées (...) en vue de préciser la “théorie sociale” de Soi-même comme un autre : dépasser le schéma foncièrement téléologique de l’action; explorer la stabilisation de l’action malgré l’incertitude inscrite dans le schéma téléologique; réinvestir la notion de contrainte; et clarifier l’ambiguïté de la notion d’institution. En conclusion, nous montrerons quels apports la mise en dialogue de Ricœur avec Giddens pourrait offrir pour accomplir ces quatre tâches. Mots-clés : Homme capable, sructuration, acteur, dualité de structure, institution, contrainte.The aim of this article is to reconstruct a dialogue between Ricœur and Anthony Giddens, in particular between the hermeneutics of the capable human and the theory of structuration. The article starts with an exploration of key concepts on the basis of which to compare the two authors on the relation between actors and systems. On Ricœur’s side the concepts of institution and practice will be commented on; on Giddens’ side notions selected to present the “duality of structure” will be considered. In the course of this exploration, four tasks will be identified by which to refine the “social theory” of Oneself as Another : surpass its ultimately teleological schema of action; explore the stabilisation of action despite the uncertainty attributed to the teleological schema; reinvest the notion of constraint; and clarify the ambiguity in the notion of institution. In conclusion the contribution of a Ricœur-Giddens dialogue to the accomplishment of these four tasks will be demonstrated. Keywords: Capable Man, Structuration, Actor, Duality of structure, Institution, Constraint. (shrink)
This paper tries to answer the question: why did Paul Ricœur keep a nearly total silence after 1963 about Soren Kierkegaard, and was there from the beginning a reticence with regard to Kierkegaard? An answer can be found in the beginning of Ricœur’s work, in his first book written with Mikel Dufrenne on Karl Jaspers et la philosophie de I ’existence. This book that is full of references to Kierkegaard also shows that it was Jaspers’ particular appropriation of the Danish (...) thinker that affected him. But, like Jaspers, Ricœur became too preoccupied with external historical, social and political life to be a true disciple of Kierkegaard. (shrink)
La recherche de Paul Ricoeur dans le champ de l'herméneutique est marquée par une longue fréquentation de la sémiotique greimassienne qu'il a voulu intégrer à la construction de l' « arc herméneutique de l'interprétation ». Cet article cherchera à comprendre la lecture que fait Ricœur de la sémiotique, de ses postulats et de ses modèles constitutionnels. On tentera de relever certains points de malentendu dans cette rencontre, et de voir en quoi la pratique de la sémiotique peut entrer selon son (...) propre chemin dans un projet de lecture et d'interprétation. (shrink)
This essay considers Paul Ricœur’s early notion of cultural memory from 1956-1960. He discusses it in two texts: “What does Humanism Mean?” and the slightly later The Symbolism of Evil. In the former, cultural memory appears as an ongoing and dynamic process of retroaction focussed on questioning and rethinking the meaning of classical antiquity for contemporary worlds, on the one hand, that is linked to an important critical aspect as a counterweight to the flattening effects of modernity, on the other. (...) In the latter, cultural memory expands the reach of the classical heritage, and, in addition to retroaction, further modes of orientation, such as relations of depth and breadth, are delineated. At first glance, cultural memory, in Ricœur’s sense, appears to be embodied in the singular, albeit generalized self. Yet, in reconstructing its meaning, the essay argues that Ricœur’s articulation of cultural memory relies on an implicit collective dimension. The present essay’s hermeneutic reconstruction of Ricœur’s notion of cultural memory comprises a preliminary step of a broader project that aims to rearticulate Jan and Aleida Assmann’s cultural memory framework along social imaginary lines. In this vein, the essay concludes with an overview of the Assmannian approach to cultural memory and considers possible bridges between Ricœur and the Assmanns. (shrink)
This article provides a brief commentary on Éric Alliez and Antonio Negri's `Peace and War', focusing mainly on their understanding of political ontology, their analysis of the transformations undergone by the link between sovereignty and warfare, and their attempt to delineate the place of artistic practice within a biopolitics of the multitude.
In contemporary political theory, democracy embodies the ideals of the Aristotelian state, the one that is most able to realize the ideal life of the political community. Nevertheless, fledgling democracies are confronted with economic and political problems which Paul Ricœur thinks are due to the essential dissymmetry between the governing authority and the governed, culminating in the violence of the powerful agent. The enjoyment of the good life in a democracy presupposes what Ricœur calls an ethics of politics, which consists (...) in nothing other than the creation of spaces of freedom which confer on the governed a structure that enables its members to pursue the aim of enduring indefinitely in the future. When the governing authority buries into oblivion the desire of the historical community to live well with and for others in just institutions, the governed are expected to act in concert in order to ascertain their enjoyment of the good life because they feel particularly responsible for the horizontal bond that is constitutive of their will to live together. Thus, Paul Ricœur explains that the balancing of power in common and domination is an endless task of democracy that seeks to place domination under the control of power-in-common. (shrink)
In Time and narrative then in Oneself as another Paul Ricœur proposes a philosophy of personal and collective identity, through research on time and narrative. According to these books, emplotment would synthesize and reconcile the temporal discordance, experienced by the selfhood. The subject’s fragmentation by the otherness of time could then define vulnerability. Our aim is to question this triad time-vulnerability-narrative thanks to the opposite positions of Emmanuel Levinas. Unlike Ricœur, Levinas severely criticizes the idea of memory and narrative in (...) order to respect the vulnerability of the other. Yet, the Ricœurian analysis of the responsibility affirms the need for a capable and not dispossessed Self. From this point of view, Ricœur helps us to question the limits set by Levinas to narrative and leads us to wonder if the ethical plot for the vulnerability of others does not need memory and narrative. (shrink)
In his The Symbolism of Evil Ricœur explores the dynamics of human consciousness of evil in different cultures and times. Consciousness of evil is examined by looking at the different prevailing symbols wherein human beings confess their experience with evil. Although appeared in 1960, this study is still cited in recent publications in psychology, cultural anthropology and religion. In this article I describe the context of The Symbolism of Evil as the last part of Ricœur’s study of the will and (...) give a summary of its relevant content. (shrink)
In this essay, Domenico Jervolino summarizes twenty years of Ricoeur’s reading of Patočka’s work, up to the Neapolitan conference of 1997. Nowhere is Ricoeur closer to Patočka’s a-subjective phenomenology. Both thinkers belong, together with authors like Merleau-Ponty and Levinas, to a third phase of the phenomenological movement, marked by the search for a new approach to the relation between human beings and world, beyond Husserl and Heidegger. In the search for this approach, Patočka strongly underlines the relation between body, temporality (...) and sociality. Central to this new encounter of Patočka and Ricoeur is the discovery of an idea of inter-human community based on a a-subjective conception of existence. (shrink)
This article aims to analyze the constitution of a subject of right capable of respect and esteem through the concept of capacity elaborated by Paul Ricœur. It intends to evaluate the capable, emancipated human being, the self that has an ethical and moral dimension and that is susceptible of ethical and juridical imputation, as it is explained in “Who is the Subject of Rights?” in The Just . There is an erratum for this article located here .  .
L’auteur revisite certains textes de Paul Ricœur publiés entre 1960 et 1992, afin d’exposer le rapport de cette philosophie avec la théologie chrétienne. Il interroge le statut de la théologie spéculative, dévolu par cette pensée, qui accorde un certain privilège à la théologie herméneutique et à la théologie politique.
In this anti-colonial treatise, Ricœur reflects on the responsibility of every French citizen and of the French state with respect to colonialism. He establishes five principles that should guide his readers in their reflection on this issue and expresses his support for the independence of the colonies.
Chacun des livres de Paul Ricœur est structuré comme un récit ; il naît d’un problème résiduel, et résistant, qui a échappé aux précédents, et qui constitue comme leur zone d’ombre ; de telle sorte qu’ils se présentent tous comme limités parce que la question à laquelle ils sont confrontés est délimitée. Mais, en se déplaçant sur le terrain de l’involontaire,...
Ce texte de Bernhard Waldenfels est issu de la seconde partie de son livre Socialité et altérité – modes de l’expérience sociale, 363-85), où l’auteur met à l’épreuve et approfondit sa théorie de la responsivité à travers une série de débats avec Husserl, Schütz et Gurwitsch, Searle, Castoriadis, Foucault et Ricœur. Dans sa discussion avec ce dernier, il insiste sur les thèmes du souvenir et de l’oubli, en prenant pour base Temps et récit et La mémoire, l’histoire, l’oubli. Le texte (...) se compose de quatre sections. Dans les deux premières, Waldenfels retrace les arguments de Ricœur en insistant notamment sur le manque d’importance accordé à l’oubli dans le récit par Ricœur. Dans les deux dernières, l’auteur propose une révision de la philosophie ricoeurienne de l’oubli sous le signe d’une phénoménologie responsive. À la fois à partir de Ricœur et aussi contre lui, Waldenfels considère l’oubli comme un pathos face auquel nous n’avons pas d’autre choix que répondre. (shrink)
L’auteur revisite certains textes de Paul Ricœur publiés entre 1960 et 1992, afin d’exposer le rapport de cette philosophie avec la théologie chrétienne. Il interroge le statut de la théologie spéculative, dévolu par cette pensée, qui accorde un certain privilège à la théologie herméneutique et à la théologie politique.
SUMMARYCultural and religious differences often lead to conflicts, which sometimes even degenerate into violence. This situation has triggered a debate among universalists and particularists on the possibility of a global ethic. This article does not repeat the discussion here between universalism and particularism as such. Rather, its aim is to shed new light on this discussion by turning to the French philosopher Paul Ricœur, one of the great minds of the twentieth century.My starting point is Ricœur's discussion with Hans Küng (...) on the ‘Declaration Towards a Global Ethic’. This discussion is not very well known and has, to my knowledge, not been commented upon by a third party. In this discussion Ricœur immediately signals his “inner resistance” to Küng's project. First, Ricœur states that the global ethic amounts to a “disembodied formalism” because it is founded on too radical a distinction between universal formal norms and particular religious convictions. Moreover, Küngs global ethic also neglects the challenge posed by the application of these formal principles to the ethical complexities with which people are confronted in life. After having explored these objections, I will examine how Ricœur develops an original perspective concerning the contemporary challenge of ethical diversity and the tension between particularity and universality. In this regard, especially his so-called little ethics deserves our attention.In unpacking and analyzing Ricœur's ethical reflections and elaborating on them in view of the context of diversity, I hope not only to argue how this Ricœurian perspective sheds new light on the discussion concerning the possibility of a global ethic but also to contribute in a very specific way to Ricœur studies. In this sense, the following article can also be read as an intercultural or interreligious appropriation of Ricœur's ethical reflections. (shrink)
Ricoeur’s Philosophy of the Will is reexamined here both as a source of motivation for his project of dialoguing with the analytic theory of action and as an explanation for the lack of response on the part of his Anglo-American interlocutors. Keywords: Actions, Language, Body, Idealism. Résumé La Philosophie de la volonté de Ricœur est revisitée ici comme source de motivation de son entreprise de dialogue avec la théorie analytique de l’action et comme explication du défaut de réponse de ses (...) interlocuteurs anglo-américains. Mots-clés: Actions, Langage, Corps, Idéalisme. (shrink)
In this paper I consider Ricœur’s negotiation of the boundary or relationship between philosophy and religion in light of the larger debate in contemporary French philosophy. I suggest that contrasting his way of dealing with the intersection of the two discourses to that of two other French thinkers (Jean-Luc Marion and Michel Henry) illuminates his stance more fully. I begin with a brief outline of Ricœur’s claims about the distinction or relation between the discourses, then reflect on those of Marion (...) and Henry, who although they do not relate them in the same way still together form a significant contrast to Ricœur’s perspective, and conclude with a fuller consideration of Ricœur’s methodology in light of this comparison. I suggest that it is in particular his hermeneutic commitments that lead him both to more rigorous distinctions between discourses and ironically to greater mediation. (shrink)
Thinking with Paul Ricœur is a great pleasure and an even greater challenge. The more we seem to understand his life project, the more perplexed we are when facing the inescapability of the incompleteness, incomprehensibility, and impenetrability of what calls for thinking. Ricœur remains a faithful companion on the way to understanding oneself and reaching the inaccessible, despite the unprecedented progress of psychology, psychoanalysis, psychotherapy, and religion.
For Paul Ricœur, human action was a central preoccupation already present in his early work and deepening over time, benefitting from a long engagement with hermeneutical and narrative analyses. It is the concern to locate, through obligatory moral norms, the ethical dimension of desire that guides and motivates action that first makes use of a hermeneutic of signs, symbols, and texts in which the desire of the subject has been expressed. But narratives become essential in order to describe action in (...) such a way that the actor’s responsibility can be evaluated at the level of his narrative identity. To this responsibility, interpreted and taught by means of cultural narratives, the concepts of memory and promise add the dimension of the struggle for recognition and point to an ontology of the historical condition at the foundation of an ethic that rests open to a religious dimension of an original goodness. (shrink)