On November 14th, 1770, the young chemist Antoine-Laurent Lavoisier (1743–1794) read his ‘Sur la nature de l’eau’ to the Académie des Sciences. Eventually published in the Académie’s journal in 1773, the two-part memoire challenged a widely held view of earlier experimenters: the transmutability of matter. Specifically, experimenters such as Jean-Baptiste Van Helmont (1580–1644), Robert Boyle (1627–1691), and Ole Borsch (1626–1690) had noted that when distilled water was heated in a glass vessel, a small amount of earthy residue remained, (...) seemingly demonstrating the transmutation of water into earth. Antoine-Laurent designed an experiment to determine whether it was really to the ‘destruction of a portion of the water that this residual earth owed its origin, or if it was to that of the glass.’ In partial agreement with Jean-Baptiste Le Roy (1720–1800), a fellow academician, Antoine-Laurent aimed to disprove the antiquated belief – the transmutation of one element into another – by using a glass vessel from the alchemist’s cabinet: the pelican. (shrink)

BOTH Lavoisier and Columbus are universally and deservedly famous, but owing to the divergence between their fields of endeavour and the different periods in which they flourished, it will probably come as something of a surprise to the reader to find their names coupled together. They were thus connected by a French author, Franqois Pagbs (1745-1802), who wrote a collection of imaginary dialogues between well-known public figures of the past as well as of the times in which he lived. (...) Each dialogue illustrates a particular moral aphorism with which it closes. The dialogues of the dead with the maxims they are supposed to set forth are as follows. (shrink)

This essay focuses on an unknown Latin translation of Georg Ernst Stahl's treatise on the nature of sulfur (Zufällige Gedancken und Nützliche Bedencken über den Streit von dem so genannten Sulfure). The original edition, published in 1718, laid the foundation for the phlogiston theory, which dominated European chemistry until the early 1770s. However, the dissemination of the treatise on sulfur outside the German states remained limited. Its Latin translation proposes a different scenario as it was owned by three prominent French (...) chemists: Étienne-François Geoffroy, Jean Hellot and Antoine-Laurent Lavoisier. Geoffroy's early interest in Stahl's chemistry has been evidenced and it is suggested that the acquisition of the manuscript might be linked to his connection with Stahl through Caspar Neumann, a chemist from Berlin. When he entered in the possession of the manuscript Jean Hellot wrote a long excerpt of Stahl’s work. Lavoisier acquired the manuscript in 1766, and his critical reading of Stahl's work significantly influenced his own effort to outline a new theory of combustion. This manuscript represents a significant historical connection between Stahl’s phlogiston theory and Lavoisier's revolutionary ideas. (shrink)

SINCE the publication in 1952 of Douglas McKie's Antoine Lavoisier, the standard biography which is of great value to all students of eighteenth-century science, there has been a steady increase in knowledge of most aspects of Lavoisier's life and work. This survey will be concerned ,mainly with monographs and papers in scientific and historical journals, but several important books may first be noted.

The list of Antoine-Laurent Lavoisier's opponents is a long and distinguished one, ranging from Joseph Priestley and Henry Cavendish to Jean-Paul Marat. Among the less distinguished members of this company is Antoine Monnet, a minor chemist and mineralogist whose fame rests in large part on the very fact that he and Lavoisier became enemies. Unlike his better-known contemporaries, Monnet remains almost wholly neglected, and no attempt has yet been made to sort out the issues in his (...) controversy with Lavoisier; instead, Lavoisier's biographers have been content to accept Lavoisier's own version of at least a part of the affair, with the result that Monnet has emerged as the villain of the piece and Lavoisier as the injured victim. The two men probably first came into close contact in 1776 or 1777, the nature of their relationship has remained obscure for the period 1777–1780, and the situation after 1780 has been summarized by biographers in a manner resembling that of Edouard Grimaux:“ayant en main tous les documents réunis par Guettard et Lavoisier, il [Monnet] ajouta de nouvelles cartes à celles qui étaient déjà gravées, et publia, en 1780, un altas minéralogique incomplet, qu'il signa avec Guettard, tout en s'attribuant la plus grande part du travail. Il cita, il est vrai, Lavoisier comme l'auteur des seize premières cartes, mais il utilisa sans son aveu et sans le nommer les matériaux préparés pour le reste du travail, et négligea d'indiquer que les coupes placées en marge de chaque carte étaient le résultat des nivellements faits au baromètre par Lavoisier. Celui-ci en fut vivement froissé … Il trouva toujours en Monnet un adversaire obstiné qui, en 1798, attaquait encore les doctrines nouvelles en publiant une soi-disant Démonstration de la fausseté des principes des nouveaux chimistes.”. (shrink)

Implicit in the theoretical chemical writings of Antoine Laurent Lavoisier is a theory of language that is not in complete harmony with the philosopher of language whom he takes as his explicit authority, Condillac. Lavoisier's reform of the nomenclature of chemistry leads to his dividing scientific language into two sets with different properties: a denotative artificial nomenclature and connotative natural language. This division supposedly permits knowledge to be stored in the nomenclature while the natural language retains the (...) rhetorical tools necessary for creative thought and argument. The consequences of this reform of scientific language are, however, the opposite of what Lavoisier had intended. (shrink)

Le laboratoire alchimique, qui passe volontiers pour le lieu privilégié de l’élaboration de la chimie ancienne, symbolisait à la fois le caractère privé, si ce n’est secret, de cette science et la nécessaire articulation de ses théories avec une pratique qui lui donnait son sens : il ne s’agissait pas seulement de trouver la pierre philosophale, mais aussi de fabriquer des médicaments et des substances chimiques répondant aux demandes sociales. Lieu privé, réservé à des disciples choisis, il...

Summary The balloon mania between 1783 and 1785 put an extraordinary strain on the Paris Academy of Sciences, threatening its status as the highest tribunal of European science. Faced with repeated royal directives and public frenzy, the Academy manoeuvred carefully to steer the research toward the hydrogen balloon and thereby to maintain its scientific superiority. Antoine-Laurent Lavoisier seized this moment when the promise of ‘the empire of airs’ brought science to the centre of public attention to push his (...) theoretical reform for chemistry. He utilized the established protocol of the Academy and the resources of the Republic of Letters to broadly publicize his first decomposition of water in April 1784. Once he attained the publicity and the balloon fever began to cool, he staged a much more elaborate experiment for the experts in February 1785. Although this second, large-scale experiment cost much expense and effort, Lavoisier never published a full account. The differential care given to the two experiments can only be understood in their divergent rhetorical contexts. The written accounts in 1784 addressed the court of public opinion, while the exclusive performance in 1785 aimed at the court of experts to inaugurate the collaborative phase of the Chemical Revolution. (shrink)

Summary The balloon mania between 1783 and 1785 put an extraordinary strain on the Paris Academy of Sciences, threatening its status as the highest tribunal of European science. Faced with repeated royal directives and public frenzy, the Academy manoeuvred carefully to steer the research toward the hydrogen balloon and thereby to maintain its scientific superiority. Antoine-Laurent Lavoisier seized this moment when the promise of ?the empire of airs? brought science to the centre of public attention to push his (...) theoretical reform for chemistry. He utilized the established protocol of the Academy and the resources of the Republic of Letters to broadly publicize his first decomposition of water in April 1784. Once he attained the publicity and the balloon fever began to cool, he staged a much more elaborate experiment for the experts in February 1785. Although this second, large-scale experiment cost much expense and effort, Lavoisier never published a full account. The differential care given to the two experiments can only be understood in their divergent rhetorical contexts. The written accounts in 1784 addressed the court of public opinion, while the exclusive performance in 1785 aimed at the court of experts to inaugurate the collaborative phase of the Chemical Revolution. (shrink)

Nietzsche once proclaimed himself the 'Buddha of Europe', and throughout his life Buddhism held enormous interest for him. While he followed Buddhist thinking in demolishing what he regarded as the two-headed delusion of Being and Self, he saw himself as advocating a response to the ensuing nihilist crisis that was diametrically opposed to that of his Indian counterpart. In this book Antoine Panaïoti explores the deep and complex relations between Nietzsche's views and Buddhist philosophy. He discusses the psychological models (...) and theories which underlie their supposedly opposing ethics of 'great health' and explodes the apparent dichotomy between Nietzsche's Dionysian life-affirmation and Buddhist life-negation, arguing for a novel, hybrid response to the challenge of formulating a tenable post-nihilist ethics. His book will interest students and scholars of Nietzsche's philosophy, Buddhist thought and the metaphysical, existential and ethical issues that emerge with the demise of theism. (shrink)

Les auteurs de cet essai, spécialistes reconnus de l'écologie, reviennent sur le sens de l'écologie, notion cruciale et pourtant sujette à toutes les confusions. Ils retracent avec force et simplicité son origine historique et philosophique afin d'en saisir les enjeux politiques, économiques et urbains dans le monde d'aujourd'hui. Cette mise au point est l'occasion de redéfinir le sens du progrès ou de la modernité, à l'heure où la planète souffre d'une surexploitation de ses ressources par l'Homme. Cet ouvrage critique nous (...) offre l'opportunité de redéfinir la place de l'Homme dans un monde où l'hégémonie d'un anthropocentrisme inconsidéré n'est plus viable. C'est enfin un hymne à la beauté du monde et une revendication : le droit de chacun à préserver ses racines et ses repères. L'écologisme politique doit s'opposer à l'effacement des signes naturels, culturels et historiques qui donnent aux territoires leurs personnalités et les ancrent dans une histoire. L'écologisme ne peut se résumer à une simple tendance : il s'agit d'un humanisme se souciant des générations à venir, qui s'attache à préserver et à transmettre un héritage commun à tous. (shrink)

Le laboratoire alchimique, qui passe volontiers pour le lieu privilégié de l’élaboration de la chimie ancienne, symbolisait à la fois le caractère privé, si ce n’est secret, de cette science et la nécessaire articulation de ses théories avec une pratique qui lui donnait son sens : il ne s’agissait pas seulement de trouver la pierre philosophale, mais aussi de fabriquer des médicaments et des substances chimiques répondant aux demandes sociales. Lieu privé, réservé à des disciples choisis, il .

We develop a mathematical formalism that allows to study decoherence with a great level generality, so as to make it appear as a geometrical phenomenon between reservoirs of dimensions. It enables us to give quantitative estimates of the level of decoherence induced by a purely random environment on a system according to their respectives sizes, and to exhibit some links with entanglement entropy.

Plus que Malebranche lui-même, ce volume interroge les potentialités complexes de ses textes et les différents prismes qui les ont réfractées, dans des contextes et à des desseins souvent bien différents de ceux de l'Oratorien. Plus que de savoir si telle ou telle réception est ou non "fidèle" aux "intentions" de Malebranche, ce volume entend participer à une réflexion plus large sur une méthodologie de l'histoire des idées soucieuse de n'occulter aucune des lectures réelles d'une œuvre à la fois apologétique (...) et grosse de matériaux subversifs. (shrink)

"Comment faites-vous pour défendre l'assassin d'un enfant?" C'est souvent cette question que les avocats pénalistes entendent à propos de leur métier. L'avocat est représenté, dans la fiction, sous les traits d'un être ambigu, sans cesse sur le fil... La réalité est sans doute tout autre. C'est elle que ce livre tente d'approcher en comblant un manque dans les réflexions contemporaines de l'avocature. Rares sont, en effet, les travaux qui abordent l'éthique de l'avocat pénaliste. Quelles sont ses interrogations, ses incertitudes lorsqu'il (...) est confronté à des choix de défense? A travers une enquête menée auprès d'avocats, l'auteur s'intéresse aux intentions, aux pratiques quotidiennes effectives et aux enjeux de responsabilité du pénaliste. Comment les mutations juridiques et politiques de la défense pénale orientent-elles les valeurs de l'avocat et sa manière d'agir? Par-delà la dimension déontologique de son métier, quelles relations d'ordre éthique l'avocat entretient-il avec lui-même mais aussi avec l'autre : son client, qu'il soit prévenu, accusé ou victime, les jurés, les magistrats? Peut-on parler du rapport de l'avocat à la vérité? Cette vérité est-elle spécifique? Plurielle? Le procès équitable permet-il d'affirmer une égalité des armes devant la justice? Comment l'avocat peut-il construire des lignes de défense tout en restant partenaire de justice? En définitive, est-il possible de comprendre l'acte même de défense des actes extrêmes, des crimes monstrueux sans prendre conscience de la complexité d'une réflexion éthique? Avocats, magistrats, policiers, journalistes, bâtonniers, et bien sûr tous ceux qui se destinent à ces professions, et puis encore les citoyens qui s'intéressent à la justice et les citoyens qui la découvrent en tant que jurés, tous ceux-là, pour des raisons très diverses, tireront profit de la lecture de cet ouvrage. (shrink)

La 4e de couverture indique : "Les Lumières sont souvent invoquées dans l'espace public comme un combat contre l'obscurantisme, combat qu'il s'agirait seulement de réactualiser. Des lectures, totalisantes et souvent caricaturales, les associent au culte du Progrès, au libéralisme politique et à un universalisme désincarné. Or, comme le montre ici Antoine Lilti, les Lumières n'ont pas proposé une doctrine philosophique cohérente ou un projet politique commun. En confrontant des auteurs emblématiques et d'autres moins connus, il propose de rendre aux (...) Lumières leur complexité historique et de repenser ce que nous leur devons : un ensemble de questions et de problèmes, bien plus qu'un prêt-à-penser rassurant. Les Lumières apparaissent dès lors comme une réponse collective au surgissement de la modernité, dont les ambivalences forment aujourd'hui encore notre horizon. Partant des interrogations de Voltaire sur le commerce colonial et l'esclavage pour arriver aux dernières réflexions de Michel Foucault, en passant par la critique post-coloniale et les dilemmes du philosophe face au public, L'Héritage des Lumières propose ainsi le tableau profondément renouvelé d'un mouvement qu'il nous faut redécouvrir car il ne cesse de nous parler.". (shrink)

In the following article, starting from a progressive understanding of his own subjectivity, a determining factor in developing his capacity to listen to adolescents, the author puts forward the hypothesis that a professional position he describes as "in-between" requires rigor and flexibility, enabling professionals to remain permeable to the unconscious mobilizations of the adolescent-subjects as well as to his own. The author will draw on the results of a longitudinal, partnership-based study that he conducted with ten adolescents, from 2015 to (...) 2020, involving a team of specialized prevention educators. More specifically, the author will retrospectively analyze some excerpts from his encounter with one of the teenagers to reveal possible ways in which a "professional of the social bond" might adopt a rigorous in-between position. (shrink)

This volume explores the relationship between physics and metaphysics in Descartes’ philosophy. According to the standard account, Descartes modified the objects of metaphysics and physics and inverted the order in which these two disciplines were traditionally studied. This book challenges the standard account in which Descartes prioritizes metaphysics over physics. It does so by taking into consideration the historical reception of Descartes and the ways in which Descartes himself reacted to these receptions in his own lifetime. The book stresses the (...) diversity of these receptions by taking into account not only Cartesianisms but also anti-Cartesianisms, and by showing how they retroactively highlighted different aspects of Descartes’ works and theoretical choices. The historical aspect of the volume is unique in that it not only analyzes different constructions of Descartes that emerged in the 18th, 19th and 20th centuries, but also reflects on how his work was first read by philosophers across Europe. Taken together, the essays in this volume offer a fresh and up-to-date contribution to this important debate in early modern philosophy. (shrink)