In this article, I side with those who argue that the debate about the definition of “disease” should be reoriented from the question “what is disease” to the question of what it should be. However, I ground my argument on the rejection of the naturalist approach to define disease and the adoption of a normativist approach, according to which the concept of disease is normative and value-laden. Based on this normativist approach, I defend two main theses: (1) that conceptual analysis (...) is not the right method to define disease and that conceptual engineering should be the preferred method and (2) that the method of conceptual engineering should be implemented following the principles of Alexandrova’s account of social objectivity in the context of the definition of disease. (shrink)

In this paper, my goal is to use an epistemic injustice framework to extend an existing normative analysis of over-medicalization to psychiatry and thus draw attention to overlooked injustices. Kaczmarek has developed a promising bioethical and pragmatic approach to over-medicalization, which consists of four guiding questions covering issues related to the harms and benefits of medicalization. In a nutshell, if we answer “yes” to all proposed questions, then it is a case of over-medicalization. Building on an epistemic injustice framework, I (...) will argue that Kaczmarek’s proposal lacks guidance concerning the procedures through which we are to answer the four questions, and I will import the conceptual resources of epistemic injustice to guide our thinking on these issues. This will lead me to defend more inclusive decision-making procedures regarding medicalization in the DSM. Kaczmarek’s account complemented with an epistemic injustice framework can help us achieve better forms of medicalization. I will then use a contested case of medicalization, the creation of Premenstrual Dysphoric Disorder in the DSM-5 to illustrate how the epistemic injustice framework can help to shed light on these issues and to show its relevance to distinguish good and bad forms of medicalization. (shrink)

In this paper, I argue for a new way to understand the integration of facts and values in the concept of mental disorder that has the potential to avoid the flaws of previous hybrid approaches. I import conceptual tools from the account of procedural objectivity defended by Helen Longino to resolve the controversy over the definition of mental disorder. My argument is threefold: I first sketch the history of the debate opposing objectivists and constructivists and focus on the criticisms that (...) led to the emergence of the debate. Second, I offer a reconstruction of the “Natural Function Approach” argument to make explicit an unsound assumption underlying this approach. The reconstruction will allow me to show that the NFO’s argument depends on the ideal of value-free science that I will criticize. Then I propose an alternative ideal for psychiatry: social objectivity. I argue that the concept of mental health should be seen as “socially objective” rather than value-free, moving the debate towards the social procedures by which the definition is produced rather than the normative and factual content of its definition. (shrink)

The provision of informed consent is a prerequisite for inclusion of a patient in a clinical research project. In some countries, the legislation on clinical research authorizes a third person to provide informed consent if the patient is unable to do so directly . This is the case during acute stroke, when the symptoms may prevent the patient from providing informed consent and thus require a third party to be approached. Identification of factors associated with the medical team’s decision to (...) resort to surrogate consent may help the care team during the inclusion process and enable the patient’s family circle to be better informed about providing surrogate consent. (shrink)

In this paper, we want to take a critical stance towards Tsou’s recent proposal that a neuro-oriented version of the homeostatic property cluster kind model (MPCK) should be an ideal for the DSM. Our strategy will be to discuss the creation of the Social Pragmatic Communication Disorder (SPCD) in DSM-5 to show the limits of MPCK as an ideal for the next DSM deliberations over a set of diagnoses revisions. We argue that an ideal model for the DSM should address (...) the issues of deep uncertainties and pragmatic considerations to be useful in this context. (shrink)

Anne-Marie Gagné-Julien et Pierre-Olivier Méthot Durant les deux dernières décennies, plusieurs questions classiques de la philosophie de la médecine et de la psychiatrie ont connu un renouvellement. Des angles de recherche jusqu’alors peu explorés font désormais l’objet de vifs débats, et les questions traditionnelles ont été réinterprétées à la lumière de ces nouveaux développements. En examinant ces récents thèmes grâce aux contributions de chercheur.e.s francophones, ce dossier vise à nourrir la progression de cette « nouvelle » philosophie de (...) la médecine et de la psychiatrie, à apporter un éclairage inédit sur certains de ses domaines et de ses objets encore méconnus de même que sur ses courants et ses problématiques émergents, et ainsi à faire avancer des débats classiques sous des angles nouveaux. (shrink)

ABSTRACT:One recent body of work has concerned medicalization and how it can create epistemic injustice. It focuses on medicalization as a hermeneutical process that shapes the conceptual framework(s) we use to refer to some conditions/experiences. In parallel, some scholars with lived experience of madness have started to explore the epistemic harms suffered by the Mad community. Building on this, I argue that the process of medicalization in psychiatry affects the Mad community in a specific way that has been overlooked in (...) the literature on medicalization and epistemic injustice. That is, medicalization can create what is called "contributory injustice." This form of injustice occurs when marginalized communities have been able to create alternative hermeneutical resources, but these resources are dismissed or discredited by the dominant group. I argue that the emerging field of Mad Studies is a victim of this type of injustice when Mad experiences are unilaterally medicalized. (shrink)

La création récente du diagnostic de trouble dysphorique prémenstruel (TDPM) dans le DSM-5 a été contestée sous de multiples angles. Les principales critiques mettent en avant les lacunes en faveur de la validité du TDPM, ainsi que le risque de pathologisation et de stigmatisation des changements physiques et comportementaux vécus par les femmes pendant leur phase prémenstruelle. Pour éclairer cette controverse, j’emprunte certains outils du cadre conceptuel des injustices épistémiques (IE) développé par Miranda Fricker. Plus précisément, je vais me baser (...) sur de récents travaux qui ont tenté d’appliquer ce cadre aux processus de catégorisation en médecine et en psychiatrie. Cela me permettra de mettre au jour un angle mort du débat actuel sur le TDPM, soit les perspectives des personnes touchées par ces symptômes. Ces points de vue ont été généralement négligés, mais le cadre des IE nous permet de recentrer le débat sur les intérêts et les besoins des personnes affectées par les processus de catégorisation psychiatrique. (shrink)

In the debate over the definition of ‘mental health,’ three different approaches are generally distinguished: the normativist approach, the hybrid approach and the naturalistic approach. This paper qualifies this classification by clarifying the sense in which Christopher Boorse defends a naturalistic approachvis-à-visthe central concepts of psychiatry. This paper also clarifies in what way Boorse is opposed to the normativist approach advocated by some authors of the anti-psychiatric movement, such as Szasz.

First, I want to thank PPP for the privilege of having my work read and commented on by esteemed colleagues. In this response, I briefly review some of the key issues that they have raised. These issues include 1) the usefulness of a definition of mental disorder for North American psychiatry, 2) the absence of a concrete criterion to address the demarcation problem, 3) the place and role of values in such a demarcation, and 4) the worries of over-inclusiveness, problematic (...) values and imposition of values.The first question that needs to be clarified is raised by Waterman's commentary : Is it really necessary to define mental disorder and mental health? Here I feel I should clarify a background assumption of... (shrink)

The anti-psychiatry movement of the 20th century has notably denounced the role of values and social norms in the shaping of psychiatric categories. Recent activist movements also recognize that psychiatry is value-laden, however, they do not fight for a value-free psychiatry. On the contrary, some activist movements of the 21st century advocate for self-advocacy in sciences of mental health in order to reach a more accurate understanding of psychiatric categories/mental distress. By aiming at such epistemic gain, they depart from the (...) anti-psychiatry movement. Through the analysis of the epistemic and political influence of two of these movements – Neurodiversity and the Mad Studies, we show how this new activism has taken a scientific turn compatible with current philosophical scientific frameworks, while still developing a critical approach on psychiatry. (shrink)

Christopher Boorse’s Biostatistical Theory of Health has been the main contender among naturalistic accounts of health for the last 40 years. Yet, a recent criticism of this theory, presented by Elselijn Kingma, identifies a dilemma resulting from the BST’s conceptual linking of health and statistical typicality. Kingma argues that the BST either cannot accommodate the situation- specificity of many normal functions or cannot account for many situation-specific diseases. In this article, we expand upon with Daniel Hausman’s response to Kingma’s dilemma. (...) We propose that recalling Boorse’s specification that health is an intrinsic property of its bearers and explicating this intrinsic property in relation to the concept of homeostasis can illuminate how proponents of naturalistic accounts of health should deal with the situation- specificity of normal functions. We argue that beyond what Boorse and Hausman have delineated, the situation- specificity of normal function cannot be fully captured in a simple dichotomy between normal and abnormal environment or between relevant and irrelevant situations. By bringing homeostasis to the fore of the analysis of health, we set out a richer picture of what the various situations that affect living organisms’ functional performance can be. Accordingly, we provide a broader classification of these various situations which, we contend, better accounts for the main intuitions that philosophers of medicine have sought to accommodate than previous naturalistic theories of health. (shrink)

This article puts experience of both mildwifery students and beginner psychiatric nurses into perspective. It analyzes dynamics which contribute to build their relationship to the job. The inquiry, as Dewey defines it, is chosen as the analytic entry. Starting from health care professionals’ speech about subjectively significant situations, it emphasiz-es suggestions brought throughout the caring activity. They highlight three dimensions which are constituent of the relationship to the job. These are specifically brought out and discussed here : the relashionship with (...) the vulnerable other, the place of uncertainty in the caretakers’ activity and the building of a clinical sense. (shrink)

Julien Offray de La Mettrie (1709-51), author of Machine Man (1747), was the most uncompromising of the materialists of the eighteenth century, and the provocative title of his work ensured it a succès de scandale in his own time. It was however a serious, if polemical, attempt to provide an explanation of the workings of the human body and mind in purely material terms and to show that thought was the product of the workings of the brain alone. This (...) fully annotated edition presents a new English translation of the text together with the most important of La Mettrie's other philosophical works, translated into English for the first time, and Ann Thomson's introduction examines his aims and the scandalous moral consequences which he drew from his materialism. (shrink)

SummaryThis article looks at the discussions of natural law by the eighteenth-century French materialists Julien Offray de La Mettre, Denis Diderot, Paul Thiry d'Holbach and Claude-Adrien Helvétius. It is particularly concerned with their discussion of moral values and their attempt to find a materialistic basis for them as part of their rejection of religion. The discussion brings out the différences between them and analyses their dialogues on this question, including the other materialists' rejection of La Mettrie's amoralism, which threatened (...) to undermine their attempt to found a natural law taught by experience and based on human nature. Particular attention is paid to Diderot's many writings which grapple with the subject, beginning with his Encyclopédie article droit naturel, probably written in 1754. He discussed the question in many of his later writings, including in his annotations on the works of Helvétius, who based natural law on the general interest. These writings reveal a tension between Diderot's emphasis on the search for individual happiness and the interests of society as he, together with d'Holbach, attempted to provide a natural basis for morality and government from which to criticise existing institutions. (shrink)

Julien Offray de La Mettrie, author of Machine Man, was the most uncompromising of the materialists of the eighteenth century, and the provocative title of his work ensured it a succès de scandale in his own time. It was however a serious, if polemical, attempt to provide an explanation of the workings of the human body and mind in purely material terms and to show that thought was the product of the workings of the brain alone. This fully annotated (...) edition presents an English translation of the text together with the most important of La Mettrie's other philosophical works translated into English, and Ann Thomson's introduction examines his aims and the scandalous moral consequences which he drew from his materialism. (shrink)

Les vingt-quatre contributions qui composent ce volume collectif se donnent pour objectif de fournir au lecteur un ensemble de repères historiques et conceptuels permettant de s'orienter dans le vaste territoire des théories contemporaines de l'imagination, de 1918 à aujourd'hui. Cet ouvrage présente ainsi, grâce à une enquête pluraliste et interdisciplinaire, un point de vue privilégié pour apprécier les différentes stratégies qui, au cours des cent dernières années, en réhabilitant l'importance et la puissance féconde de la "folle du logis", repensent la (...) valeur du savoir littéraire et humaniste."--Page 4 of cover. (shrink)

There are countless circumstances under which random individuals COULD act together to prevent something morally bad from happening or to remedy a morally bad situation. But when OUGHT individuals to act together in order to bring about a morally important outcome? Building on Philip Pettit’s and David Schweikard’s account of joint action, I will put forward the notion of joint duties: duties to perform an action together that individuals in so-called random or unstructured groups can jointly hold. I will show (...) how this account of joint duties is preferable to one which defends individual duties to cooperate. I then discuss the limits of joint duties and the ways in which one can fail to comply with them. It will become apparent that the circumstances under which individuals in random collectives acquire such joint duties are rare. (shrink)

Cet ouvrage interroge les articulations problématiques entre art, flux et contemporain, à partir de pratiques artistiques actuelles où interviennent le quotidien, le sociologique et le collectif. Traversé par des flux de toute sorte, le monde contemporain soulève la question de sa représentabilité, alors que les artistes ont, depuis toujours, éprouvé le besoin de se mettre en adéquation avec lui. Comment en effet montrer ce qui sans cesse se meut? Pourquoi suivre les mouvances du monde? Et finalement, que peut l'art d'aujourd'hui? (...) Il s'agit pour les artistes d'adopter une position de contemporanéité car toute observation du monde, fût-elle opérée sur un mode contemplatif, ne peut être l'objet de l'inactif et de l'inopérant. C'est pourquoi "devenir contemporain" est une nécessité, une injonction politique et éthique aussi bien qu'esthétique. Il nous faut dès lors entreprendre une "esthétique du contemporain", elle qui nous portera vers un "contemporain de l'esthétique" guidé par les flux et les devenirs. (shrink)

Why equality cannot be conditional on a shared human “nature” but has to be for all For centuries, ringing declarations about all men being created equal appealed to a shared human nature as the reason to consider ourselves equals. But appeals to natural equality invited gradations of natural difference, and the ambiguity at the heart of “nature” enabled generations to write of people as equal by nature while barely noticing the exclusion of those marked as inferior by their gender, race, (...) or class. Despite what we commonly tell ourselves, these exclusions and gradations continue today. In Unconditional Equals, political philosopher Anne Phillips challenges attempts to justify equality by reference to a shared human nature, arguing that justification turns into conditions and ends up as exclusion. Rejecting the logic of justification, she calls instead for a genuinely unconditional equality. Drawing on political, feminist, and postcolonial theory, Unconditional Equals argues that we should understand equality not as something grounded in shared characteristics but as something people enact when they refuse to be considered inferiors. At a time when the supposedly shared belief in human equality is so patently not shared, the book makes a powerful case for seeing equality as a commitment we make to ourselves and others, and a claim we make on others when they deny us our status as equals. (shrink)

"Deleuze plonge la critique kantienne transcendantale dans le bain dissolvant d'un empirisme renouvelé. Ce livre se propose de restituer cette entreprise, et d'analyser l'étonnante création de ce concept, que Deleuze mène depuis ses premières monographies jusqu'à Différence et Répétition dans un dialogue fécond avec l'histoire de la philosophie. Par quelles opérations de distorsion et de collage, Deleuze compose-t-il l'empirisme de Hume, la théorie du signe comme force de Nietzsche, le virtuel et les multiplicités de Bergson, les modes de Spinoza, les (...) individualisations impersonnelles de Simondon pour renouveler la théorie kantienne du transcendantal? C'est tout l'objet de cette enquête, qui permet d'entrer dans le laboratoire du penseur, pour saisir la philosophie se faisant, mais qui permet également d'expliquer l'insistance du transcendantal dans toute son oeuvre"--P. [4] of cover. (shrink)

The most remarkable about the continuity in Chomsky's thought about language is that it takes place against a theoretical landscape in constant flux, the landscape of generative grammar. Chomsky introduced a central distinction between E‐languages and I‐language, the internalized knowledge of language that each speaker has and which is the result of the interaction between his or her language faculty and the (limited) experience that he or she had of his or her mother tongue during language acquisition. The Faculty of (...) Language narrowly understood corresponds to “the abstract linguistic computational system alone, independent of the other systems with which it interacts”. This chapter aims to follow the trail of Chomsky's strongly reiterated claim throughout the years that language is not primarily a tool for communication, but rather, a tool for thought. (shrink)

Vers une stylistique des imaginaires langagiers Si la description du matériau langagier mis en jeu dans tel ou tel corpus se situe à la base de toute analyse stylistique, la visée ultime de l’opération est d’approcher un style, catégorie littéraire éminemment polysémique. L’analyse stylistique, en effet, peut avoir pour finalité de dégager les habitudes langagières de tel auteur ; elle peut aussi vouloir évaluer cette pratique en l’historicisant – ne serait-ce que parce que depuis le milieu du xixe siècle, la (...) langue littéraire présente des formes particulières, et que la conception du style, dès lors, s’en trouve modifiée. C’est là le postulat méthodologique dont on partira. Le corollaire d’une telle perspective est qu’une œuvre, quelle qu’elle soit, reflète un imaginaire langagier inscrit dans tel ou tel « moment » de l’histoire littéraire. La démarche ne peut être que comparative ; elle suppose donc la constitution d’un corpus pluriel dont la pertinence est définie par une proximité d’effets, qui reposent eux-mêmes sur la récurrence de « patrons » stylistiques. Mais afin de ne pas fausser le jeu, il faut nécessairement solliciter des corpus périphériques (et on se demandera comment les définir), permettant de mettre en évidence des ressemblances et des filiations aussi bien que des divergences : ce n’est qu’ainsi que l’on rendra compte de la complexité mais aussi de l’organisation du champ littéraire à un moment donné. C’est cette méthode d’analyse stylistique que l’on essaie de mettre en œuvre à partir des romans de Samuel Beckett, Robert Pinget et Claude Simon parus dans les années 1950. (shrink)

One puzzle concerning highly idealized models is whether they explain. Some suggest they provide so-called ‘how-possibly explanations’. However, this raises an important question about the nature of how-possibly explanations, namely what distinguishes them from ‘normal’, or how-actually, explanations? I provide an account of how-possibly explanations that clarifies their nature in the context of solving the puzzle of model-based explanation. I argue that the modal notions of actuality and possibility provide the relevant dividing lines between how-possibly and how-actually explanations. Whereas how-possibly (...) explanations establish claims of possible explanations, how-actually explanations establish claims of actual ones. Models, in turn, simply provide evidence for these claims. (shrink)

Our moral obligations can sometimes be collective in nature: They can jointly attach to two or more agents in that neither agent has that obligation on their own, but they – in some sense – share it or have it in common. In order for two or more agents to jointly hold an obligation to address some joint necessity problem they must have joint ability to address that problem. Joint ability is highly context-dependent and particularly sensitive to shared (or even (...) common) beliefs. As such, joint ability can be deliberately generated in a given collection of agents by providing information related to collective goals and contributory actions. As moral agents, we regularly face problems wherein the outcome of our actions depends on how others choose. There are two ways of deliberating about our own choices in such cases. We can either think of our choices as best responses to others’ choices (I-mode reasoning). Or we can think of our own choices as contributions to the collectively best option (even when we do not know how others are (likely) to choose) (we-mode reasoning). In deliberating about the right (individual) course of action vis-à-vis collective action problems, agents regularly we-frame the case at hand, that is, they include options in their deliberation that are only collectively available, and they we-reason with regard to their individual contributory actions. It is a necessary condition for collective obligations that potential collaborators facing a joint necessity case have grounds to privilege we-reasoning over reasoning in I-mode. (shrink)

The traditional concept of prime matter – a purely potential substratum that persists through substantial change and serves to constitute the generated substance – has played a dwindling part in Aristotelian scholarship over the centuries. In medieval interpretations of Aristotle, prime matter was thought to play these two roles in all substantial changes, not only in changes at the level of the four elements. In more recent centuries, traditional prime matter was relegated only to the context of substantial changes between (...) the four elements. And in the last few decades of Aristotelian scholarship, it has become common either to downplay or even to eliminate prime matter’s role in elemental changes too. I will support the traditional concept of prime matter by showing that it aligns Aristotle’s view of elemental change with one of the central constraints on matter imposed in his Physics to a degree that cannot be achieved on the non-traditional interpretations: the need for matter to be in potentiality in a way that avoids the two problematic extremes of mere persistence, on the one hand, and destruction, on the other. This point will be supported by Aristotle’s rejection of both monism and pluralism in On Generation and Corruption. Second, I will argue that Aristotle calls for precisely the same kind of potentiality in a very different context: his critique of Anaxagoras’s view of matter in the Generation of Animals. Here the very same problematic extremes of mere persistence and destruction that plague the alternate views to traditional prime matter also plague the dominant views on the matter for animal generation. Especially since Aristotle takes living things to be paradigmatic substances, these comparisons suggest that the apparent idiosyncrasies of elemental transformation which have motivated interpreters to depart from traditional prime matter may not be so idiosyncratic after all. And if that is so, it may be that the problem lies not so much with traditional prime matter as with our assumptions about how persistence and constitution work in substantial change according to Aristotle. In the end, this line of argument opens the door to three new potential interpretations of the matter for substantial generation in Aristotle, interpretations which align with his concept of potentiality and – to varying degrees – with traditional prime matter as well. (shrink)

Nous n'aimons guère le spirituel républicain. Un spectre, dira-t-on, vestige de gloires révolues, épouvantail obsolète d'un imaginaire laïque passablement décharné. Forgé dans l'atelier conceptuel de la Révolution française, irriguant le dialogue de la philosophie et des sciences sociales naissantes, le problème du gouvernement des esprits est le point névralgique du XIXe siècle. Et telle est la distance qui nous sépare d'auteurs apparemment aussi hétérogènes que Comte, Michelet, Tocqueville ou Pierre Leroux : rendre effective la liberté des modernes suppose d'abord d'affronter (...) l'énigme du pouvoir spirituel. Heureux émancipés ou mélancoliques vitupérants, nous sommes les héritiers d'une sacralité républicaine qui fut conjointement cernée de tragique et ourlée d'espoirs. Ce livre retrace l'histoire d'une contrariété. (shrink)

Que sont les « lois de la nature » que les sciences empiriques, et en premier lieu la physique, tentent de saisir? Et si les scientifiques ne peuvent les découvrir, ou du moins les confirmer, que sur la base de l’expérience, quels sont la nature et le fondement de leurs opérations inductives? Comment garantir la possibilité d’une authentique connaissance de ces lois qui structurent la réalité? Ce livre propose une enquête épistémologique et métaphysique au cours de laquelle deux fils directeurs (...) s’entremêlent. Il s’agit d’une part de s’interroger sur la nature ontologique des lois, à partir des débats contemporains en philosophie analytique des sciences. Les lois de la nature sont-elles, comme le pensent les empiristes humiens, de simples régularités factuelles universelles? Ou bien devraient-elles être conçues comme des faits nomiques d’un autre ordre, capables de rendre nécessaires les régularités que nous observons? Il s’agit d’autre part de remettre sur le métier le problème classique de l’induction que nous héritons de Hume. L’induction n’est-elle que l’opération de généralisation qualitative à partir de l’expérience? Exige-t-elle, comme on le suppose souvent, de montrer que la nature est uniforme et que les lois sont stables dans le temps? Pour résoudre ces problèmes, nous développons une théorie inédite des lois, centrée sur l’analyse de leur nature quantitative, et proposons un fondement nouveau à l’induction scientifique, qui repose sur l’existence, dans la réalité physique, de structures quantitatives. Nous montrons ainsi que c’est la possibilité d’appliquer les mathématiques, dans la formulation des lois physiques, qui garantit la connaissance inductive. (shrink)

There is a traditional conception of knowledge but it is not the Justified True Belief analysis Gettier attacked. On the traditional view, knowledge consists in having a belief that bears a discernible mark of truth. A mark of truth is a truth-entailing property: a property that only true beliefs can have. It is discernible if one can always tell that a belief has it, that is, a sufficiently attentive subject believes that a belief has it if and only if it (...) has it. Requiring a mark of truth makes the view infallibilist. Requiring it to be discernible makes the view internalist. I call the view Classical Infallibilism. (shrink)

Prison work creates ethical challenges for which a training program was initiated for Dutch prison staff to foster their Moral Craftsmanship (MCS). The concept of MCS is not yet defined and operationalized in literature. This explorative study aims to 1) define MCS, 2) identify conceptual elements of MCS, and 3) develop a measurement tool for MCS. A document and literature study provided input for the definition and selection of conceptual elements related within DCIA policy documents, identifying three conceptual levels of (...) MCS: individual (cognition, attitude, and actions), team, and leadership. This first MCSQ consists of seventy-one items distributed across the domains: values and norms, judgment and reasoning, consultation, implementation, looking back, interactions, and leadership. We tested its usability via ‘think-aloud interviews.’ Validation of the current version of the MCS-Questionnaire and consensus among experts about what to include or exclude in the concept of MCS are needed for further development. (shrink)

La radiation électromagnétique chez Maxwell, Lorentz et Ritz.--La radiation électromagnétique et la théorie de la relativité.--La radiation électromagnetique et les principes de la physique.--La radiation électromagnétique et la matière.--La radiation électromagnétique et l'éther.

Repenser l'universalisme classique, ce n'est pas réveiller le démon du particularisme, de la pureté biologique et des passions fascistes, ni tomber dans le piège de l'identité comme fondement de toute légitimité, ou couper la République en deux. C'est, tout au contraire, chercher le chemin d'un humanisme à la mesure du monde. Partout, des plateaux de chaînes info aux tribunes des grands hebdomadaires, des interviews présidentielles aux phénomènes de librairies, on dresse le même constat: l'universalisme, indissociable de l'esprit français, pilier de (...) la République, ferait face à un péril mortel. Dans le récit qui structure le discours politico-médiatique en France, l'antiracisme présentable d'antan, validé par les partis de gauche pour son ambition universaliste -- lutter en même temps contre toutes les haines collectives en intégrant tout le monde -- se verrait supplanté par un antiracisme 'décolonial', 'indigéniste' et 'catégoriel', dont la grille de lecture serait 'racialisante.' Si ce nouvel antiracisme est perçu comme une menace pour l'universalisme, c'est parce que ses promoteurs joueraient avec le feu communautariste. L'antiracisme 2.0 serait ainsi un racisme déguisé, utilisant des concepts essentialisants qui ne valent guère mieux que les théories de la suprématie blanche. Idiots utiles du soft power américain ou apprentis-sorciers de la gauche radicale, ses idéologues formeraient avec l'extrême droite une 'tenaille identitaire' visant à renverser l'ordre républicain, en déclenchant rien moins qu'une guerre des races. Mais de quel universalisme parle-t-on? Dans quelle mesure le concept fait-il l'objet d'un monopole intellectuel? Pourquoi ceux qui se pensent et se disent universalistes sont-ils convaincus qu'il n'en existe qu'une seule forme -- celle qu'ils professent? Et comment expliquer l'équivalence morale entre racisme et antiracisme qui sous-tend leur 'modèle'? Telles sont les questions que pose cet essai qui se veut à la fois une critique de la raison pseudo-universaliste et une approche de l'universalisme postcolonial, ou créolisé. (shrink)