A collection of essays that takes stock of the current impact of the image and imagination of the catastrophe in art, science and philosophy.

En opposant comme deux substances irréductibles l’âme et le corps, Descartes n’explique pas l’unité qui est en l’homme. En décrivant l’effort comme une réalité intermédiaire entre le corps et l’âme, Maine de Biran ressaisit l’individualité même. Devant le mystère humain, il faut donc invoquer l’expérience biranienne et non la métaphysique cartésienne : il convient d’appréhender, avant toute analyse, l’unité d’un élan, qui se disperse peut-être, mais garde sa souplesse.

On observe aujourd'hui un intérêt croissant pour la philosophie et pour les spiritualités comme la mystique chrétienne, le bouddhisme tibétain ou zen, l'advaitavedânta ou le taoïsme. Ce livre cherche à construire des ponts entre philosophie et mystique, entre rationalité et intuition et à réunir ce qui n'aurait pas dû être séparé. Ainsi à travers des études sur des philosophes et des mystiques orientaux et occidentaux (Nicolas de Cuse, Bergson, Berkeley, Maître Eckhart, Vasubandhu, Rumi...), l'auteur éclaire de façon nouvelle la véritable (...) signification de l'éveil et trace un chemin vers lui. Il montre qu'une voie philosophique peut et doit conduire au sommet de la mystique, c'est-à-dire à l'éveil non-duel. Érudit mais simple, ce livre intéressera à la fois le lecteur passionné de philosophie en quête de sens et le chercheur en spiritualité. (shrink)

Materialism can be defined both historically and philosophically as a type of thinking that began in 1745 with La Mettrie, Helvétius, Diderot, and d’Holbach. This type of materialism is characterized by three shared principles. The first principle relates to the establishment of an explicitly anti-religious and atheistic philosophical system. Such a topic is not a theme of Canguilhem’s philosophy. The second principle pertains to the material unity of the world; it is often termed ‘materialistic monism’. Canguilhem, however, does not grant (...) matter the status of a first principle; moreover, he does not treat the distinction between inanimate and animate matter as secondary. A natural history of life is not to be confused with a natural history of matter. The third principle addresses the autonomy of the mode of construction of the real with regard to thinking. This autonomy is such that intellectual faculties are themselves dependent on the properties of sensible matter. This latter point is also not retained by Canguilhem. Not only does the border between animate, living nature and material nature exclude the ability to understand animate, living nature solely in terms of matter, but furthermore, life itself cannot be explained by the organization of matter alone. (shrink)

In this article we consider the growing interest in recent years in the use of documentary strategies in the wold of contemporary art, film and performing arts and explore some of the central epistemological assumptions underpinning the persistent idea that the documentary should be equated with ‘non-fiction’. Following Stella Bruzzi we argue that if documentary theory maintains objectivity as the primary measure of value, it will inevitably and continuously arrive at the conclusion that the documentary genre is fundamentally flawed. Instead, (...) we propose to move beyond the ‘realist epistemology’ of documentary theory and focus on the ‘documentary real’, i.e. the specific performativity of the reality constructed in and by the documentary genre. In the last paragraphs, we introduce the various articles that address the “documentary real” in this special issue. (shrink)