Cette étude met en confrontation Michel Henry avec Paul Ricoeur sur la question de la lecture de S. Freud. Il y est donc question de la psyché et de l’affectivité. L’auteur de l’étude rappelle combien le projet de la rationalité contemporaine conjoint des thèses philosophiques sur le statut du sujet et sur celui des schèmes perceptifs de la conscience, au gré d’une relation complexe entre l’étant et le phénomène. L’auteur rappelle les analyses husserliennes relatives à la psyché entendue comme (...) « vie » et ses effets de co-implication. Chez M. Henry, l’inconscient est toutefois compris, soit comme un « inconscient de la représentation », mais cela dans une perspective critique, soit comme cet autre nom de la « vie », spécifiquement dans ses structures d’auto-révélation et d’auto-affectivité. En reprenant la nature du débat entre M. Henry et P. Ricoeur, l’auteur montre que tout l’enjeu réside dans la place que l’on confère aux effets et opérations de la dialectique et de la réflexivité. (shrink)

Jean-Sébastien Hardy | : Cet article se donne pour tâche de reconstruire le projet d’une phénoménologie des passions formulé par Ricoeur au début des années 50, projet pourtant délaissé ensuite. Après avoir explicité les motifs de cet abandon en les rapportant à la position du jeune Ricoeur face à la phénoménologie husserlienne, nous chercherons à montrer que ce dernier fournit néanmoins une définition proprement phénoménologique de l’affectivité passionnelle, qui ressaisit les passions selon leur intentionnalité spécifique et leur renvoi (...) systématique à des passions originaires. Sur cette base, il s’agira enfin de mettre en lumière la relecture ricoeurienne de l’anthropologie kantienne des passions, qui culmine dans la thèse d’une fonction constituante des passions fondamentales dans le rapport au monde vécu. | : The aim of this paper is to reconstitute Ricoeur’s early project of a phenomenology of the passions. After having examined the motives which led Ricoeur to leave this project behind, we will try to show that Ricoeur nonetheless sketched out a rigorously phenomenological conception of the world of passions, by describing their specific intentionality as well as their systematic reference to the three fundamental passions of possession, power and honor. On this basis, the last scope of this paper will be to shed light on Ricoeur’s account of Kant’s anthropology of passion, which leads to the idea that the fundamental passions are involved in the subjective and intersubjective constitution of the lifeworld. (shrink)

Julien Claparède-Petitpierre Cet article aborde la question du bien-être à partir du problème sociologique et psychologique de la socialisation. Deux types de théories distinctes de la socialisation sont ici cernés qui posent de façon différente la question du rapport entre émotions et bien-être. En premier lieu, les théories de la répression (Freud) et des sentiments moraux (Elster) font du processus de socialisation une expérience d’émotions négatives puissantes suscitées par l’intériorisation du jugement moral d’autrui dans la psyché individuelle. Qu’elle soit naturalisante (...) (Freud) ou culturaliste (Benedict, Elster), cette approche repose sur l’idée d’une contradiction entre les aspirations pulsionnelles de l’individu et les réquisits moraux du groupe. Cette contradiction, qui induit une violence affective (angoisse du rejet, honte) et un renoncement systématique aux satisfactions du désir, montre la socialisation comme un processus conflictuel générant inévitablement du mal-être. En second lieu, les théories de l’apprentissage font de la socialisation un processus générateur de bien-être dans la mesure où la découverte cognitive des règles qui structurent le champ social permet à l’individu de devenir un acteur social compétent et à l’aise dans les interactions quotidiennes. Ces théories distinguent l’affectivité de haute intensité, générée par l’angoisse ressentie par l’acteur social incompétent et désorienté, de l’affectivité de basse intensité reposant sur le sentiment de confiance affectant l’acteur social compétent (Quéré). Cette seconde approche illustre l’intérêt que porte l’individu à la maîtrise des règles sociales. Quoique distinctes, ces deux positions ne s’opposent pas, voire semblent pouvoir être articulées à profit. (shrink)

Il s’agit dans cet article de montrer que l’éthique ricoeurienne exposée dans Soi-même comme un autre peut et doit être pensée par rapport à l’anthropologie et l’ontologie que le philosophe a progressivement développées depuis son premier grand projet philosophique phénoménologique jusqu’à son œuvre de maturité. Dans le but d’esquisser cette approche des fondements onto-anthropologiques de l’éthique ricœurienne, nous partons d’abord des textes de jeunesse de Ricœur dans lesquels il développe une longue méditation sur le risque qu’implique l’acte de la liberté: (...) risque d’être soi-même, de décider et d’agir sur le monde avec et pour les autres. Puis, notre analyse s’intéresse à la conception ricœurienne du consentement et de l’affectivité afin de voir dans quelle mesure elle est susceptible d’éclairer le développement de l’éthique et de la notion de sujet éthique dans le cadre de la phénoménologie herméneutique de Ricœur. L’article conduit ainsi une analyse de la question du “je peux” et du “je veux” dans Le volontaire et l’involontaire, en passant par L’homme faillible pour déboucher enfin sur un examen de “l’homme agissant et souffrant” dans Soi-même comme un autre. (shrink)

I pursue here a wish of Ricœur: to analyze ideology and utopia from a genetic phenomenology, in the sense of Husserl in the _Cartesian Meditations_, which “strives to dig under the surface of apparent meaning to the most fundamental meanings.” A single innovative interest guides my proposal between two contrasting phenomenologies of the imagination in Michel Henry and Paul Ricœur: to root, on the one hand, the dialectical mediation of ideology and utopia in the living immanence of the affective imagination (...) and, on the other hand, to inscribe the power of its expression as well as its power to act in the social and cultural field require to hold together the affective immanence of life, the figuration of the social reality and the socio-cultural and historical praxis. The psychoanalytical interpretation of the cultural imaginary to the bending of the affect and the language and the micro-history of the social practices of the representations serve here as “forks caudines,” under which the immanent phenomenology of the affective imagination is led to a hermeneutics of the imaginative practices of the discourse and the action. (shrink)

Cette réflexion tentera de comprendre comment se pose le problème de la genèse de l’initiative, en commençant par s’interroger sur la perception affective à partir du concept de corps propre, pour montrer ensuite comment l’intentionnalité qui caractérise sa relation aux objets est aussi ce qui aiguille un désir, explicité par Ricœur à travers le concept de “thumos.” L’intention éthique procèdera du désir: désir de manifester une liberté, désir que la liberté de l’autre advienne. À partir de ces éléments d’analyse, nous (...) essaierons de montrer comment l’initiative articule les aspects téléologique et déontologique de l’éthique, participe à l’avènement d’un sujet éthique tout en suscitant sa créativité. (shrink)

Paul Ricoeur was one of the most important philosophers of the twentieth century. In this short and accessible book, he turns to a topic at the heart of much of his work: What is translation and why is it so important? Reminding us that The Bible, the Koran, the Torah and the works of the great philosophers are often only ever read in translation, Ricoeur reminds us that translation not only spreads knowledge but can change its very meaning. (...) In spite of these risk, he argues that in a climate of ethnic and religious conflict, the art and ethics of translation are invaluable. Drawing on interesting examples such as the translation of early Greek philosophy during the Renaissance, the poetry of Paul Celan and the work of Hannah Arendt, he reflects not only on the challenges of translating one language into another but how one community speaks to another. Throughout, Ricoeur shows how to move through life is to navigate a world that requires translation itself. Paul Ricoeur died in 2005. He was one of the great contemporary French philosophers and a leading figure in hermeneutics, psychoanalytic thought, literary theory and religion. His many books include Freud and Philosophy and Time and Narrative. (shrink)

Le phénomène de « perversion » occupe une position bien particulière dans les domaines psychopathologique et psychanalytique. Selon la théorie de Freud, le rêve a pour effet de libérer les désirs refoulés pendant la journée. Au lieu d’être refoulés au tréfonds de l’inconscient, la plupart des vécus du pervers se manifestent dans sa vie en prenant des formes anormales ou immorales telles que le voyeurisme ou l’exhibitionnisme. La perversion est donc un phénomène foncièrement conscient et corporel. Or, si la phénoménologie (...) est définie comme l’analyse de la structure des vécus de la conscience intentionnelle, il s’avère nécessaire d’analyser phénoménologiquement cette structure de la perversité au lieu de se contenter d’étudier la conscience dite saine ou normale. Pour aborder cette question, cet article analyse le texte de Marc Richir, intitulé Phantasia, imagination, affectivité, car il y tente de dégager la structure de la conscience du pervers d’une façon tout à fait innovante. (shrink)

Major psychoanalytic thinkers from Freud to Ricoeur to Lacan considered the Oedipus complex the key to explaining the human psyche and human sexuality, even culture itself. But, in fact, they were merely theorizing males. In this title, originally published in 1993, the author reassesses the benchmark concepts of Freudian thought, building on feminist criticisms of psychoanalysis and the new history of sexuality. The psychoanalytic questions become political questions: How do the norms of heterosexuality and masculinity themselves emerge within modern (...) society and culture? How do the institutions of compulsory heterosexuality and modern patriarchy shape identity and desire? What make heterosexuality compulsory in our society? Brenkman argues that the larger social world is part and parcel of the Oedipus complex. He challenges psychoanalysis to reinvent its cultural project, as a therapeutics and an ethics, by recovering the moral-political dimension in its approach to family, sexuality and gender. Straight Male Modern casts a new light on psychoanalysis’s contribution to modern life, revealing the richness of the Freudian tradition’s encounter with modern politics and culture, and the poverty of its response. (shrink)

Views of the self may be plotted on a set of coordinates. On the axis that runs from fragmentation to unity, Rorty and Rorty's Freud champion the decentered self while Wallwork, Taylor, and Ricoeur argue for a sovereign, unified self. On the other axis, which runs from the disengaged, inward-turning self to the engaged and "sedimented" self, Wallwork, would be positioned near Rorty, defending self-creation against the narrative identity affirmed by Taylor and Ricoeur. Despite his skepticism concerning the (...) communitarian agenda of the narrativists, Flanagan grants that the self is social and relational--a position further explored by Oliver, Stendahl, Deutsch, and Mack in "Selves, People, and Persons". (shrink)

This article presents an edited version of lectures given by Paul Ricœur at Johns Hopkins University in April 1966. Ricœur offers a comparative analysis of Wittgenstein’s and Husserl’s late works, taking the problem of language as the common ground of investigation for these two central figures of phenomenology and analytic philosophy. Ricœur develops his study in two parts. The first part considers Husserl’s approach to language after the Logical Investigations and concentrates on Formal and Transcendental Logic ; leaving a transcendental (...) reflection on language behind it re-examines a phenomenological conception, according to which the sphere of logic is not separable from that of experience. The main focus of the second part is Wittgenstein’s later philosophy as it moved on from the conception of an isomorphic relation between language and the world, as set out in the picture theory in the Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus , to the more pragmatic notion of a language-game in the Philosophical Investigations . In order to get beyond the irrevocable differences between the two philosophies and the unresolved theoretical issues on both sides, Ricœur suggests turning to a semiological paradigm based on the Saussurean distinction between “language” and “speaking.” Keywords: Analytic Philosophy, Husserl, Phenomenology, Semiology, Wittgenstein. Résumé Cet article est une version éditée de conférences données par Paul Ricœur à la Johns Hopkins University en avril 1966. Ricœur propose une analyse comparée des dernières œuvres de Wittgenstein et Husserl, avec le problème du langage comme sol commun d’investigations pour ces deux figures centrales de la phénoménologie et la philosophie analytique. Cette analyse de Ricœur se joue à travers deux parties. La première partie revient sur l'approche du langage chez Husserl depuis Recherches logiques avec une attention particulière aux développements de Logique formelle et logique transcendantale ; dans le cadre d’une réflexion transcendantale sur le langage il revient sur une conception phénoménologique selon laquelle, le domaine du logique n’est pas séparable de celui de l'expérience. La deuxième partie se concentre principalement sur la dernière philosophie de Wittgenstein alors qu’il s'est départi de l’idée d’une relation isomorphique entre le langage et le monde telle que posée par la théorie du tableau dans le Tractatus logico-philosophicus , pour s’engager vers la notion plus pragmatique de jeu de langage dans les Investigations philosophiques . Afin de surmonter les différences irrémédiables entre les deux philosophies et, dans une certaine mesure, certains des problèmes théoriques non résolus depuis les deux bords, Ricœur fait finalement référence à un paradigme sémiologique et à la distinction saussurienne entre “langue” et “parole.” Mots-clés: Husserl, phénoménologie, sémiologie, philosophie analytique, Wittgenstein. (shrink)

Mon propos est d'explorer les voies ouvertes à la philosophie contemporaine par ce qu'on pourrait appeler la greffe du problème herméneutique sur la méthode phénoménologique. Je me bornerai à un bref rappel historique, avant d'entreprendre l'investigation proprement dite, laquelle devrait, à son terme au moins, donner un sens acceptable à la notion d'existence,—un sens où s'exprimerait précisément le renouvellement de la phénoménologie par l'herméneutique.

This article presents an edited version of lectures given by Paul Ricœur at Johns Hopkins University in April 1966. Ricœur offers a comparative analysis of Wittgenstein’s and Husserl’s late works, taking the problem of language as the common ground of investigation for these two central figures of phenomenology and analytic philosophy. Ricœur develops his study in two parts. The first part considers Husserl’s approach to language after the Logical Investigations and concentrates on Formal and Transcendental Logic ; leaving a transcendental (...) reflection on language behind it re-examines a phenomenological conception, according to which the sphere of logic is not separable from that of experience. The main focus of the second part is Wittgenstein’s later philosophy as it moved on from the conception of an isomorphic relation between language and the world, as set out in the picture theory in the Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus , to the more pragmatic notion of a language-game in the Philosophical Investigations . In order to get beyond the irrevocable differences between the two philosophies and the unresolved theoretical issues on both sides, Ricœur suggests turning to a semiological paradigm based on the Saussurean distinction between “language” and “speaking.” Keyword: Analytic Philosophy, Husserl, Phenomenology, Semiology, Wittgenstein. Résumé Cet article est une version éditée de conférences données par Paul Ricœur à la Johns Hopkins University en avril 1966. Ricœur propose une analyse comparée des dernières œuvres de Wittgenstein et Husserl, avec le problème du langage comme sol commun d’investigations pour ces deux figures centrales de la phénoménologie et la philosophie analytique. Cette analyse de Ricœur se joue à travers deux parties. La première partie revient sur l'approche du langage chez Husserl depuis Recherches logiques avec une attention particulière aux développements de Logique formelle et logique transcendantale ; dans le cadre d’une réflexion transcendantale sur le langage il revient sur une conception phénoménologique selon laquelle, le domaine du logique n’est pas séparable de celui de l'expérience. La deuxième partie se concentre principalement sur la dernière philosophie de Wittgenstein alors qu’il s'est départi de l’idée d’une relation isomorphique entre le langage et le monde telle que posée par la théorie du tableau dans le Tractatus logico-philosophicus , pour s’engager vers la notion plus pragmatique de jeu de langage dans les Investigations philosophiques . Afin de surmonter les différences irrémédiables entre les deux philosophies et, dans une certaine mesure, certains des problèmes théoriques non résolus depuis les deux bords, Ricœur fait finalement référence à un paradigme sémiologique et à la distinction saussurienne entre “langue” et “parole.” Mots-clés: Husserl, phénoménologie, sémiologie, philosophie analytique, Wittgenstein. (shrink)

Ce livre propose une traversee de l'oeuvre de Sartre depuis la constitution de son programme philosophique dans les annees 1920-1930 jusqu'aux dernieres consequences intellectuelles qu'il en tire, pour la philosophie, pour la litterature et pour la politique, dans les annees 1970. En se donnant pour tache de reconstituer chez Sartre ce qui se donne comme une anthropologie politique des emotions, il suit au gre de l'histoire du vingtieme siecle, de ses sequences politiques, de ses " violences " et de ses (...) luttes, notamment decoloniales, les differentes manieres dont la phenomenologie existentialiste sartrienne prend en charge la crise de la fonction intellectuelle consecutive, selon la formulation d'Enzo Traverso, a la guerre civile europeenne. Proposant, a partir de plusieurs archives, de nouvelles lectures des rapports de la philosophie de Sartre avec differents massifs de la pensee contemporaine, qu'il s'agisse de Bergson ou d'Alain, de Heidegger ou de Nietzsche, de Freud et de Ferenczi ou encore de Camus et de Fanon, ce livre est une invitation a une autre histoire politique du XXeme siecle et, davantage encore, a une autre poetique de l'histoire intellectuelle qui en fut l'inseparable doublure. Il ne peut des lors manquer de deborder vers la situation qui est la notre. Plutot qu'une periode de resignation, notre epoque est plus probablement une epoque qui est activement privee de cette reserve d'affectivite et de puissance politiques qui merite le nom de savoirs critiques. (shrink)

Compares Freud's conception of religion being negative for the health of our psyche to Kierkegaard's theory of stages culminating in the necessity of a relationship to God for self-realization.

이 논문을 통해 우리는 리쾨르 철학에서 프로이트의 현존(présence)을 확인하고 이것이 리쾨르 철학의 중요한 국면들에서 어떤 영향을 끼쳐 왔는지를 찾아보고 확인하는 작업을 하려고 한다. 리쾨르 철학의 관점에서 보면 프로이트 담론은 ‘현상학의 해석학적 변형’이고자 하는 리쾨르 자신의 마지막 철학적 단계에서 결정적 역할을 하는 방향타라고 볼 수 있다. 리쾨르를 현대 해석학을 대표하는 인물로 자리매김하는 데 핵심적인 내용을 제공해준 담론 역시 프로이트의 담론일 것이다. 물론 여전히 기술현상학의 틀과 한계 내에서 움직이고 있는 『의지의 철학 I』과 『해석에 대하여: 프로이트에 관한 시론』 사이의 결정적 차이는 “반성”이 일종의 (...) 해석학이어야 한다고 주장함으로써 “반성에 철저히 연계된 해석학적 방법”을 가져오는 데 있어 그가 프로이트 담론에 의존하고 기대었다는 것이다. 욕망의 선재성, 사유에 대한 ‘sum’의 선재성을 프로이트 담론이 설득력 있게 드러내는 이상, 반성은 그런 (욕망하는) 삶의 기호들을 해석하는 프로이트 담론을 만나지 않고 피해 가는 방법은 없었다. 리쾨르에게 프로이트는 필연적인 우회(détour)의 길이었다. 현상학적 철학의 한계와 근대적 반성철학의 전통에 새로운 전기를 마련하는 데 프로이트 담론의 독창적인 기여를 인정하는 차원이라고 보는 게 정확할 것이다. 리쾨르 철학의 긴 여정 속에서 1950년 전후에 프로이트 담론은 (기술현상학이라는) 제한된 관점과 전망 속에서 처음으로 도입되고, 1965년을 전후하여 확장되며 변형된 (해석학적) 대면과 도전의 차원에서 논의되며, 1990년 전후해 2008년까지는 이전의 도입과 대면의 지점을 넘어 충분히 성숙하여 침윤되어 그의 철학 안에 내면화되는 지점에 도달하게 되었다. (shrink)

In later, retrospective texts where he explained his hermeneutical turn, Paul Ricoeur claimed that this turn was due to the impossibility of knowing oneself directly, through introspection, and the necessity to undertake the detour of interpretation with regard to knowledge of oneself. By going back to the first occurrences of this hermeneutical turn in his work of 1960, The Symbolism of Evil, this paper argues that other motives, which were later forgotten, were also at play and perhaps more instrumental, (...) most notably the intention of salvaging modernity against itself and of curing it of its forgetfulness of the sacred. (shrink)

Every reader of Ricoeur knows that hermeneutics endeavors to answer the aporiae of historical phenomenology. Hence arises the need to return to those aporiae and those answers. On the one hand, phenomenology, born with the maxim of going “directly to things themselves,” is confronted with the incessant evasion of the thing itself and with its dreams of presence being thereby shattered. This reversal should not be blamed on the failings of this or that thinker, but attributed to the very (...) destiny of phenomenology itself. On the other hand, Ricoeurian hermeneutics takes note of a gap, and of a necessary return. Thus, there is nothing for thought itself to grieve over with respect to this enterprise. However, while the phenomenology of Merleau-Ponty, faced with the same difficulties, orients itself towards political philosophy, the hermeneutics of Ricoeur rather seeks to lead us to a philosophy of religion. This article hypothesizes that, in spite of the formula of a “philosophy without an absolute,” the thought of Ricoeur heads in fair measure towards the Absolute, and that ontology is not the only name of the Promised Land. (shrink)

This article argues for a Freudian theory of internal emotion, which is best characterised as key “safety valves of the psyche”. After briefly clarifying some of Freud’s metapsychology, I present an account regarding the origin of (self-)censorship and morality as internalised aggression. I then show how this conception expands and can be detailed through a defence of a hydraulic model of the psyche that has specific “safety valves” of disgust, shame, and pity constantly counteracting specific sets of Freudian drives. This (...) model is important for explicating Freud’s crucial concept of sublimation, which continues to have key therapeutic and normative relevance today, which I show through the case of jokes. I finish with the argument that largely happy, productive lives can be seen as in a dynamic between the release of too much (perversion) and too little (neurosis) psychical pressure through these mechanisms. (shrink)

L’étude du concept de vérité constitue une voie d’entrée privilégiée dans la pensée de Michel Henry. Dès les premières pages de L’Essence de la manifestation, en 1963, le philosophe déclarait en effet massivement que « le problème de la philosophie est le problème de la vérité ». C’est que le problème de la vérité, pensé à partir de la manifestation, n’offre pas seulement le reflet fidèle des thèses philosophiques henryennes, il permet en outre de mettre au jour les inflexions et (...) radicalisations critiques que l’auteur de Phénoménologie matérielle fait subir à la méthode phénoménologique elle-même. Avec Henry, ce concept, l’un des principaux et des plus anciens de la métaphysique occidentale, se trouve refondé à partir d’une attention exclusive portée au phénomène, et à ce qui en lui apparaît. (shrink)

The unconscious, cornerstone of psychoanalysis, was a key twentieth-century concept and retains an enormous influence on psychological and cultural theory. Yet there is a surprising lack of investigation into its roots in the critical philosophy and Romantic psychology of the early nineteenth century, long before Freud. Why did the unconscious emerge as such a powerful idea? And why at that point? This interdisciplinary study breaks new ground in tracing the emergence of the unconscious through the work of philosopher Friedrich Schelling, (...) examining his association with Romantic psychologists, anthropologists and theorists of nature. It sets out the beginnings of a neglected tradition of the unconscious psyche and proposes a compelling new argument: that the unconscious develops from the modern need to theorise individual independence. The book assesses the impact of this tradition on psychoanalysis itself, re-reading Freud's The Interpretation of Dreams in the light of broader post-Enlightenment attempts to theorise individuality. (shrink)

In recent years there has been some hard-won but still limited agreement that phenomenology may be of central importance to the cognitive sciences. This realization comes in the wake of dismissive gestures made by philosophers of mind like Dennett (1991), who mistakenly associates phenomenological method with the worst forms of introspection. For very different reasons, resistance can also be found on the phenomenological side of this issue. There are many thinkers well versed in the Husserlian tradition who do not even (...) want to consider the usefulness of phenomenology for enlightening the sciences of the mind. For them cognitive science is simply too computational or too reductionistic to be seriously considered as capable of explaining experience or consciousness. [1] This is surprising in light of the fact that a highly respected phenomenologist like Merleau-Ponty was integrating phenomenological analyses with considerations drawn from the empirical sciences of psychology and neurology long before cognitive science was constructed as a framework to include just those aspects of psychology and neurology that focus on cognitive experience. Merleau-Ponty aside, philosophers on both sides of this issue have only gradually come to acknowledge the possibility that phenomenology may be directly relevant for a scientific understanding of cognition. Sometimes the empirical scientists themselves have arrived at this conclusion even before, and in spite of the philosophers. Francisco Varela's work on neurophenomenology provides an important example (Varela, 1996). Even the hardest of hard scientists have made peace offerings to phenomenology. Recently, for example, the neuroscientist Jean-Pierre Changeux declares that his purpose "is not to go to war against phenomenology; to the contrary, [he wants] to see what constructive contribution it can make to our knowledge of the psyche, acting in concert with the neurosciences" (Changeux and Ricoeur, 2000, p. 85). (shrink)

For Ricœur any study of Freud, or of psychoanalysis more generally, needs to take into account the crucial dimension of the analytic experience itself. Psychoanalysis, as a “mixed discourse,” aims to anticipate questions of meaning and explication alongside technical questions of energies, repression, displacement, and so on. The analytic experience is one which is practical and intersubjective, but which is also guided by various techniques or methods. These techniques, I will argue, should be understood as a type of techne, one (...) which is less concerned with hermeneutic questions of meaning than with quasi-scientific questions of force, feedback, struggle, and process. The practice of psychoanalysis, on the other hand, deals with the ways in which these forces or drives become meaningful for a particular subject, and within a singular context or history. This article will aim to draw out both the interrelationship between techniques and practical understanding, and also the productive incommensurability between the two. (shrink)

Freud and the Politics of Psychoanalysis is a sympathetic critique of Freud's work, tracing its political content and context from his early writings on hysteria to his late essays on civilization and religion. Brunner's central claim is that politics is a pervasive and essential component of all of Freud's discourse, since Freud viewed both the psyche and society primarily as constellations of power and domination. Brunner shows that when read politically, Freud's discourse can be seen to unite mechanics and meaning (...) into a plausible, fruitful and internally consistent theory of the mind, therapy, family and society. Part one deals with the medical and political background of Freud's work. It explains how Freud postulated mental principles that were the same for all races and nations. The second part is concerned with the logic and language of Freud's theory of the mind. Brunner also details how Freud introduced dynamics of dominance and subjugation into the very core of the psyche. Part three addresses dynamics of power in the clinical setting, which Freud forged out of a curious blend of authoritarian and liberal elements. Brunner focuses on how this setting creates an arena for verbal politics. He also examines various social factors that influenced the therapeutic practice of psychoanalysis, such as class, gender and education. Part four explores Freud's analysis of the family and large-scale social institutions. Though Brunner is critical of the authoritarian bias in Freud's social theory, he suggests that it provides a useful vocabulary to unmask hidden psychological aspects of domination and subjection. (shrink)

El siguiente trabajo se propone, en primer lugar, contraponer la lectura fi losófi ca de Ricoeur sobre la interpretación en psicoanálisis con algunos desarrollos clave de Freud y Lacan al respecto. Luego, se mostrará desde la obra del fi lósofo esloveno Slavoj Žižek cómo este concepto psicoanalítico puede ser utilizado dentro del marco de la crítica de las ideologías. De esta manera, se intentará determinar y fundamentar, al menos de manera aproximada, si la interpretación en psicoanálisis constituye una exégesis (...) o desciframiento del símbolo, o si la estructura del discurso analítico mismo exige otra concepción que no se agota en una hermenéutica. (shrink)

Psyche: Inventions of the Other brings together for the first time twenty-eight essays by Jacques Derrida that both advance his reflection on many issues, such as psychoanalysis, architecture, negative theology, theater, translation, politics, war, nationalism, and religion and carry on his engagement with a number of key thinkers and writers: Kant, Heidegger, Levinas, Lacoue-Labarthe, Freud, Flaubert, Barthes, and de Certeau, among others.

Freud's Mass Psychology examines one of the key concepts in the theory of the psyche. Surprenant treats it as an epistemological issue rather than exclusively as a socio-political issue. Focusing on this neglected concept enables the author to raise anew the question of the 'application' of psychoanalysis, beyond a mechanistic understanding of this term and of Freud's writings. This study brings together important topics associated with psychoanalysis, recent French philosophy, and political thought. The original arguments that it develops should interest (...) anyone preoccupied with the relevance of psychoanalytic concepts in philosophy and in related disciplines, notably in the field of literary studies. (shrink)

Did Freud present a scientific hypothesis about the unconscious, as he always maintained and as many of his disciples keep repeating? This question has long prompted debates concerning the legitimacy and usefulness of psychoanalysis, and it is of utmost importance to Lacanian analysts, whose main project has been to stress Freud's scientific grounding. Here Jacques Bouveresse, a noted authority on Ludwig Wittgenstein, contributes to the debate by turning to this Austrian-born philosopher and contemporary of Freud for a candid assessment of (...) the early issues surrounding psychoanalysis. Wittgenstein, who himself had delivered a devastating critique of traditional philosophy, sympathetically pondered Freud's claim to have produced a scientific theory in proposing a new model of the human psyche. What Wittgenstein recognized--and what Bouveresse so eloquently stresses for today's reader--is that psychoanalysis does not aim to produce a change limited to the intellect but rather seeks to provoke an authentic change of human attitudes. The beauty behind the theory of the unconscious for Wittgenstein is that it breaks away from scientific, causal explanations to offer new forms of thinking and speaking, or rather, a new mythology. Offering a critical view of all the texts in which Wittgenstein mentions Freud, Bouveresse immerses us in the intellectual climate of Vienna in the early part of the twentieth century. Although we come to see why Wittgenstein did not view psychoanalysis as a science proper, we are nonetheless made to feel the philosopher's sense of wonder and respect for the cultural task Freud took on as he found new ways meaningfully to discuss human concerns. Intertwined in this story of Wittgenstein's grappling with the theory of the unconscious is the story of how he came to question the authority of science and of philosophy itself. While aiming primarily at the clarification of Wittgenstein's opinion of Freud, Bouveresse's book can be read as a challenge to the French psychoanalytic school of Lacan and as a provocative commentary on cultural authority. (shrink)

After Freud and Philosophy, the place of hermeneutics in Paul Ricoeur's thought changed. Up to that point, he had used hermeneutics, treating notions such as symbol and myth as tools for clarifying the nature of volition, or the experience of evil, or the status of the unconscious. Afterward, he became more and more a theoretician of hermeneutics. One way to clarify his conception of hermeneutics is to contrast it with his view of phenomenology. Ricoeur sees hermeneutics‐at least its (...) twentieth‐century incarnation‐as emerging from phenomenology. Ricoeur's contributions to hermeneutics may be divided into three phases: the first is concerned with the hermeneutics of symbols; the second concerns the hermeneutics of metaphor; and the third consists of a hermeneutics of narrative. The best way to identify Ricoeur's contribution to hermeneutics is to compare him to Gadamer. Like Gadamer, Ricoeur develops a post‐phenomenological hermeneutics that owes a particular debt to Heidegger. (shrink)

_Abstract_: In this article, I propose an original re-interpretation of the encounter between deconstruction and psychoanalysis as it is described by Jacques Derrida in his early essay “_Freud and the scene of writing_” (1966). My working hypothesis is that Derrida first reads psychoanalysis as a _partially_ _deconstructive_ human science. To test this hypothesis, I begin by demonstrating that Derrida’s reading draws on the description of deconstructive sciences offered since his early version of_ Grammatology _(1965-66). Second, I explain that it traces (...) across Freud’s work the increasing adequation of the psychoanalytic account of psychism to the model of a somehow spontaneous archiving machine. Finally, I show that, for Derrida, as a consequence of this adequation, psychism – understood as the origin of life, temporalization and the relation to the other – also marks the beginning of the history of technics. As my analyses develop, it should become increasingly evident that any critical assessments of Derrida’s encounter with psychoanalysis must reckon with the overall project of deconstruction in which this encounter is inscribed. _Keywords_: Deconstruction; Life; Psychoanalysis; Technics; World _L’essere-nel-mondo della psiche: le prime interpretazioni freudiane di Derrida_ _Riassunto_: In questo lavoro intendo proporre una re-interpretazione originale dell’incontro tra decostruzione e psicoanalisi come lo descrive Jacques Derrida nel suo saggio “_Freud e la scena della scrittura_” (1966). La mia ipotesi di lavoro è che Derrida abbia letto in prima istanza la psicoanalisi come una scienza umana _in parte_ _decostruttiva_. Per verificare questa ipotesi inizierò mostrando che la lettura di Derrida attinge alla descrizione delle scienze decostruttive offerta sin dalle prime versioni di _Della grammatologia _(1965-66). In secondo luogo proverò a illustrare come si ritrovi nell’opera di Freud un progressivo allinearsi della descrizione psicoanalitica dello psichismo al modello di un apparato di archiviazione più o meno spontaneo. Mostrerò infine che, per Derrida, come conseguenza di questo allineamento, lo psichismo – inteso come origine della vita, temporalizzazione e relazione all’altro – segna anche l’inizio della storia della tecnica. Con lo sviluppo delle mie analisi diverrà sempre più chiaro che una valutazione critica dell’incontro di Derrida con la psicoanalisi debba fare i conti con il progetto complessivo della decostruzione in cui questo stesso incontro si iscrive. _Parole chiave_: Decostruzione; Vita; Psicoanalisi; Tecnica; Mondo. (shrink)

Cet article entend s’interroger sur « ce qui fait qu’un corps est vivant », en somme sur la nature propre et phénoménologique de la chair, ce lieu originaire où le sujet fait l’expérience à chaque fois singulière de sa condition de vivant. En portant l’interrogation précisément sur la dimension de l’originarité de la chair, I. Raviolo montre comment M. Henry lie la condition charnelle et l’épreuve affective du soi, mais en insistant sur la fragilité intrinsèque du processus, pris en ce (...) temps de finitude qui, marqué par la naissance et par la mort, fait que la vie « échappe ». C’est donc une réflexion sur l’apparaître et le disparaître du vivre dont il est ici question, et ceci, comme l’auteur y insiste fortement, dans une expérience d’une singularité telle que la chair inscrit l’homme dans « son identité d’être humain » et dans son « expérience d’une incarnation ». (shrink)