One of the most controversial issues that divided Islamic philosophers and theologians during the Middle Ages was whether human beings would have a spiritual or bodily existence after death. The idea of a world of image was conceived as a solution, suggesting that there exists a world of non-physical bodies, beyond our earthly existence. This world may be reached in sleep, in meditation or after death.From the embryonic conception by Ibn Sina, to the radical rethinking by Suhrawardi and Shahrazuri into (...) a sophisticated system, L. W. C. van Lit unravels the history of this idea. Using a distant reading approach for measuring the transmission, he further shows how the idea remained relevant for Muslim thinkers through the centuries, up until today. (shrink)

Peter Abelard (1079–1142 ce) was the most wide‐ranging philosopher of the twelfth century. He quickly established himself as a leading teacher of logic in and near Paris shortly after 1100. After his affair with Heloise, and his subsequent castration, Abelard became a monk, but he returned to teaching in the Paris schools until 1140, when his work was condemned by a Church Council at Sens. His logical writings were based around discussion of the “Old Logic”: Porphyry's Isagoge, aristotle'S Categories and (...) On Interpretation and boethius'S textbook on topical inference. They comprise a freestanding Dialectica (“Logic”; probably c.1116), a set of commentaries (known as the Logica [Ingredientibus], c. 1119) and a later (c. 1125) commentary on the Isagoge (Logica Nostrorum Petititoni Sociorum or Glossulae). In a work Abelard called his Theologia, issued in three main versions (between 1120 and c.1134), he attempted a logical analysis of trinitarian relations and explored the philosophical problems surrounding God's claims to omnipotence and omniscience. The Collationes (“Debates,” also known as “Dialogue between a Christian, a Philosopher and a Jew”; probably c.1130) present a rational investigation into the nature of the highest good, in which the Christian and the Philosopher (who seems to be modeled on a philosopher of pagan antiquity) are remarkably in agreement. The unfinished Scito teipsum (“Know thyself,” also known as the “Ethics”; c.1138) analyses moral action. (shrink)

Information is a recognized fundamental notion across the sciences and humanities, which is crucial to understanding physical computation, communication, and human cognition. The Philosophy of Information brings together the most important perspectives on information. It includes major technical approaches, while also setting out the historical backgrounds of information as well as its contemporary role in many academic fields. Also, special unifying topics are high-lighted that play across many fields, while we also aim at identifying relevant themes for philosophical reflection. There (...) is no established area yet of Philosophy of Information, and this Handbook can help shape one, making sure it is well grounded in scientific expertise. As a side benefit, a book like this can facilitate contacts and collaboration among diverse academic milieus sharing a common interest in information. . First overview of the formal and technical issues involved in the philosophy of information . Integrated presentation of major mathematical approaches to information, form computer science, information theory, and logic . Interdisciplinary themes across the traditional boundaries of natural sciences, social sciences, and humanities. (shrink)

The Neuroethics Affinity Group of the American Society for Bioethics and Humanities met for the third time in October 2007 to review progress in the field of neuroethics and consider high-impact priorities for the future. Closely aligned with ASBH's own goals of recruiting junior scholars to bioethics and mentoring them to successful careers, the Neuroethics Affinity Group placed a call for new ideas to be presented at the Group meeting, specifically by junior attendees. One group responded with the idea to (...) probe a new direction for neuroethics focused on the neuroscience of gender differences. In the spirit of full disclosure, two of the authors are a student and fellow of the program I formerly directed at Stanford University. The third is junior faculty there. The intellectual ownership of the ideas in the report below, however, are entirely theirs. Like lit torches in a juggling act, there are many directions this project can go. The report is a snapshot of these authors' first iteration of the concept of women's neuroethics. Many thanks are extended to participants of the ASBH Neuroethics Affinity Group meeting whose enthusiasm and feedback was immensely helpful in shaping the concept and moving it ahead. - Judy Illes, Editor AJOB-Neuroscience. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Rita Gross as Coeditor of Buddhist-Christian StudiesTerry C. MuckMy assignment is to celebrate Rita's editorial work on Buddhist-Christian Studies, the journal of our society. But I want to begin by acknowledging Rita's contributions to the Society for Buddhist-Christian Studies overall. Her contributions to our society have been enormous. She was a founder and visionary at the beginning. She has, I believe, held every office in the society except for (...) treasurer. And her unfailing willingness to work on whatever needed to be worked on has been an inspiration to us all.But now I want to focus on her work on the editing of Buddhist-Christian Studies. I was chosen for this because Rita and I were coeditors of the journal for ten years, from 1995 to 2005.In one sense Rita and I were guinea pigs. For the first fifteen years of the society, David Chappell, the founding editor, edited the journal. When David retired, the board decided that it would be good to have two editors of the journal, one a Buddhist, one a Christian. It was also in keeping with society commitments that one of us was a man and one a woman.The question was whether two very different people could make a coeditorship work. Coeditorships do not always work. There are two issues. The first is choosing people who actually have the skills to do the job. Coeditorships seem like a great idea when decision makers are wrestling with the internal politics of an organization, especially the issues of proper representation among office holders. In order to avoid appearing to favor one or another identity group within an organization, office-holding choices are often made according to representation rather than skill sets.There is a second issue with coeditorships. Even when the chosen pair satisfies both the representational needs of an organization and the skill sets requirements, there is a question as to whether these two particular people can work together well enough to produce a good journal, whether their work styles mesh, whether their personalities have a reasonable chance of relating positively. In case you are thinking to yourselves, this sounds like my marriage, the analogy is apt.So I would like to spend a few moments remembering for you how this worked with Rita and me. My conclusion is that is worked very well, and I have heard Rita say that from her point of view it worked very well. And there are ten volumes of [End Page 85] Buddhist-Christian Studies sitting on many of our shelves, silent testimonies to the fact that this coeditorship worked well enough so that the journal came out, came out on time, and produced essays and reviews that furthered the aims of the Society for Buddhist-Christian Studies.My recollections will be in the form of personal anecdotes and stories, since to my mind that is really what made it the fun, voluntary endeavor that the work of the society has become for many of us. I will talk about Rita, I will talk about the editing process, and I will reflect a bit on the challenges and rewards of coediting.Rita GrossI first saw Rita Gross at one of the early meetings of the forerunner of the society, the Cobb-Abe dialogue group. It was at a press conference called by the organizers of the meeting to get some publicity. Rita was being interviewed along with a male scholar who shall remain nameless. I remember two things about the press conference. One was that Rita was wearing a pair of platform shoes that appeared to me to be tippy, and I remember thinking how hard it must be to balance oneself while wearing those things. The second thing I remember was the dynamics between Rita and the male scholar. The male scholar was coming across toward her as one of the most condescending people I have ever seen, and those of you who know Rita know that she does not take to patronization very well. After the second or third of these snide comments coming Rita's way from this very famous man, she just lit into him... (shrink)

Some of the basic terminology of Yogācāra philosophy needs reevaluation. Whereas commentaries almost universally gloss the term dvaya ('duality') with some version of the phrase grāhya grāhaka ca (lit. 'grasped and grasper', but usually translated as 'subject and object'), in fact this gloss is absent from the earliest strata. The term and its gloss are derived from separate streams of Yogācāra reasoning - one from discussions of linguistic conceptualization and the other from discussions of perception. Once we see that these (...) two are distinct, it becomes clear that the commentarial literature asserts their identity in order to philosophically unify Yogācāra thought. One upshot of this is that even in this later assertion 'duality' refers not to the distinction between internal and external reality (as in 'textbook' Yogācāra), but to the falsely projected distinction between mental subjects and mental objects. (shrink)

The World of Image in Islamic Philosophy: Ibn Sīnā, Suhrawardī, Shahrazūrī, and Beyond. By L. W. C. van Lit. Edinburgh Studies in Islamic Apocalypticism and Eschatology, vol. 2. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2017. Pp. viii + 278. $110, £75.

Among Digitized Manuscripts: Philology, Codicology, Paleography in a Digital World. By L. W. C. van Lit. Handbook of Oriental Studies, I, vol. 137. Leiden: Brill, 2020. Pp. xi + 333. $150, €125, open access: https://brill.com/view/title/56196.

Résumé C’ est pour « parler au lecteur de personne à personne » que Beauvoir se lance dans l’ écriture autobiographique en 1958. Elle semble y être parvenue, si on en juge par les nombreux lecteurs qui lui ont écrit pour lui parler à leur tour de personne à personne. Nous voudrions ici étudier la présence des lecteurs dans l’ autobiographie beauvoirienne : on y découvre le souci principal de l’ auteur, soit « dissiper les malentendus » tant à propos (...) d’ elle-même que de ses œuvres. On y lit aussi sa conception d’ une littérature engagée, étroitement liée à celle de son rapport à autrui, idéalement fait de réciprocité. (shrink)

C'est Paul Vignaux le grand médiéviste de la Sorbonne, qui a préfacé le livre du P. Camille Bérubé, O.F.M., Cap., l'un de ses collègues de l'Institut d'Études Médiévales de Montréal, sur La Connaissance de l'individuel au Moyen Age. Tout en présentant l'ouvrage aux lecteurs non médiévistes, il se plaît à louer l'érudition, le sens de la synthèse et la liberté d'esprit du chercheur patient et objectif qu'est le P. Bérubé.Sans être nous-même médiéviste, il nous semble qu'il s'agit ici d'une œuvre (...) qui fait honneur à la recherche canadienne en ce domaine. Nous l'avons lu, en tout cas, comme on lit un roman d'aventures, en nous demandant dès le début et en souhaitant de plus en plus vivement, au fur et à mesure que nous progressions, ce que la suite allait nous révéler. (shrink)

« C’est une question de point de vue… » On associe aujourd’hui la perspective à l’individualisme, à l’affirmation d’une vérité privée et indépassable. C’est oublier la tradition de la perspectiva communis, celle qui fait de la perspective le vecteur d’un horizon commun. Au croisement de la science, de l’art et de la philosophie, le livre exhume une tradition que l’on se doit de redécouvrir : le point de vue, ce n’est pas seulement ce qui divise, c’est aussi ce qui se (...) partage. Au lieu d’incriminer le perspectivisme d’avoir fait le lit de la post-vérité, et de la perte d’une référence à un monde réel, il est temps de retrouver en quoi la perspective n’est pas qu’une affaire de relativisation, mais de réalisation. C’est à la perspective que nous devons notre perspicacité : « à travers » – voilà le mot-clé pour comprendre son opération. Une mise en regard d’enjeux anciens et contemporains, où s’entrecroisent les arts visuels, l’architecture, la phénoménologie et l’anthropologie sociale. Autant de manières de faire l’éloge d’une perspective qui se décline invariablement au pluriel. (shrink)

C’est grâce à son essai Politische Romantik, publié en 1919, que Carl Schmitt fait une entrée remarquée sur la scène intellectuelle allemande. L’ouvrage se présente comme une charge systématique et radicale contre la tradition allemande du « romantisme politique », et fut vivement discuté dans les années qui suivirent sa publication. Mais aujourd’hui il se trouve relégué parmi les œuvres de jeunesse de Schmitt et reste rarement étudié par la recherche, qui le lit au mieux comme une belle contribution à (...) l’histoire culturelle du xixe siècle.Pourtant, une étude approfondie de l’essai, ainsi que du contexte historique dans lequel il s’insère, fait apparaître que ce n’est pas dans une telle perspective que Politische Romantik manifeste toute sa portée : bien plus qu’une étude historique, cet essai constitue un élément de réponse à la crise du conservatisme allemand tel qu’il apparaît dans l’après-guerre. Le rejet du « romantisme politique » marque la rupture de Schmitt avec l’idéal « apolitique » des intellectuels allemands de l’époque, et par là constitue le premier moment du projet schmittien, tel qu’il se verra développé de manière croisée dans son étude sur le catholicisme et sa Théologie politique. (shrink)

Quand Deleuze lit Leibniz, il dégage une ligne de cohérence qui articule l’optimisme, le baroque et le pli, qui serait celle de la contemporanéité. Le contre-modèle de Leibniz c’est Schopenhauer. Et l’on voit que dans la critique de l’optimisme propre à Leibniz, Schopenhauer articule les fondements d’une critique de la contemporanéité, qui met par exemple en place l’enjeu écologique. Cette critique part de la discussion sur le principe de raison suffisante et se diffusa sur l’ensemble de l’œuvre de Schopenhauer. Elle (...) en constitue la trame. (shrink)

Le Jansénisme c’est d’abord un mot, une idée et une réalité. Ce sont aussi des personnages, hommes et femmes, qui au XVIIe et au XVIIIe siècles ont joué une incarnation qui n’était pas que religieuse ou théologique, malgré le primat de celle-ci. Le tableau historique que propose M. Le Guern est aussi l’analyse des positions et réactions des principaux acteurs, de Richelieu et Saint-Cyran à Antoine Arnaud, de Nicolas Pavillon et le Formulaire, jusqu’à Quesnel et la reprise des hostilités après (...) une certaine accalmie fin de siècle, avec les effets de la Bulle Unigenitus. Comme on le sait, le terme, sinon vraiment définitif dont il faudrait encore parler, du moins selon d’importants repères historiques, se lit aujourd’hui en divers mouvements qui, après miracles et convulsions, se réduiront, à défaut de se résoudre, dans les conflits, les dispersions et les dérives sectaires. Jansenism is, first of all, a word, an idea, and a reality. It also includes characters, the men and women who incarnated it during the 17th and 18th centuries, not only on a religious or theological level, despite the primacy of the latter. The historical picture that M. Le Guern proposes is also an analysis of the positions and reactions of the principle actors, from Richelieu and Saint-Cyran to Antoine Arnaud, from Nicolas Pavillon and the Formulary, all the way to Quesnel and the renewal of hostilities, after a certain calm at the end of the century, due to the effects of the Bull Unigenitus. As we know, the term “Jansenism”, while still open to discussion, can at least be interpreted today, in terms of important historical landmarks. It comprised various movements which, after miracles and convulsions, were finally degenerated –for want of a resolution – into conflicts, dissipation, and sectarian drifts. (shrink)

A lire comme on lit un roman policier : comme une analyse complexe mais systématique qui vous entraîne là où vous ne voudriez pas aller. L'argumentaire met aux prises philosophes, historiens du moderne et du global, Schmitt, Bourdieu et Foucault. Il fait apparaître qu'émerge, derrière notre dos, un État-monde de classe articulé au Système-monde impérialiste. Une anti-utopie, donc. Une thèse réaliste, qui n'est pas celle d'un État mondial. Ou bien comme on lit un recueil de nouvelles liées les unes aux (...) autres : comme autant de mises en perspective du même sujet. On peut ainsi scruter chaque chapitre pour lui-même. Les uns s'adressent aux économistes, d'autres aux sociologues et aux politologues, d'autres encore aux féministes, altermondialistes, théoriciens du discours ou chercheurs du postcolonial, d'autres enfin aux historiens, juristes ou géographes. Ils prennent chaque destinataire sur son terrain "scientifique" particulier. En y impliquant chaque fois le philosophe, c'est-à-dire aussi le citoyen. Il n'y a qu'une seule idée, un seul paradigme : une théorie. Il s'agit bien sûr de transformer le monde, mais en commençant par le comprendre, là où Marx a en partie échoué. C'est donc aussi une refondation du marxisme qui est proposée. Ce livre est le quatrième d'un ensemble publié aux PUF - Que faire du Capital?, 1985, Théorie Générale du droit, de l'économie et de la politique, 1999, Explication et reconstruction du Capital, 2004 - qui a fait l'objet de traductions en une dizaine de langues étrangères. (shrink)

Banni de la communauté juive à 23 ans pour hérésie, Baruch Spinoza décide de consacrer sa vie à la philosophie. Son objectif? Découvrir un bien véritable qui lui "procurerait pour l'éternité la jouissance d'une joie suprême et incessante". Au cours des vingt années qui lui restent à vivre, Spinoza édifie une oeuvre révolutionnaire. Comment cet homme a-t-il pu, en plein XVIIe siècle, être le précurseur des Lumières et de nos démocraties modernes? Le pionnier d'une lecture historique et critique de la (...) Bible? Le fondateur de la psychologie des profondeurs? L'initiateur de la philologie, de la sociologie et de l'éthologie? Et surtout, l'inventeur d'une philosophie fondée sur le désir et la joie, qui bouleverse notre conception de Dieu, de la morale et du bonheur? À bien des égards, Spinoza est non seulement très en avance sur son temps, mais aussi sur le nôtre. C'est ce que j'appelle le "miracle" Spinoza. Frédéric Lenoir raconte la vie édifiante de Spinoza que Goethe, Nietzsche, Freud ou Einstein considéraient comme le plus grand des philosophes. Il rend accessible sa pensée foisonnante et livre un traité philosophique d'émancipation, qui se lit presque comme un thriller tant on a envie de connaître l'étape suivante et d'atteindre la joie suprême. Une lecture qui donne une force et une énergie incroyables."--Page 4 of cover. (shrink)

Nietzsche pousse tout au long de son oeuvre un cri contre la paresse, la médiocrité, le confort, la sécurité de l’acquis, et invite à se risquer à chaque instant dans le contact nu avec la vie — au risque de s’y brûler. Toute réticence pour lui est négation de la vie. Sauter dans le feu, pour devenir dieu ou mourir. — Il en est mort... -/- Pourtant lorqu’on lit ses mots, n’a-t-on pas l’impression qu’il était tout prêt de déchirer le (...) voile? -/- «J’ai découvert pour moi que la vieille humanité, la vieille animalité, oui même tous les temps primitifs et le passé de toute existence sensible, continuent à vivre en moi, à écrire, à aimer, à haïr, à conclure, – je me suis réveillé soudain au milieu de ce rêve, mais seulement pour avoir conscience que je rêvais tout à l’heure et qu’il faut que je continue à rêver, pour ne pas périr: tout comme il faut que le somnambule continue à rêver pour ne pas tomber. Q’est désormais pour moi l’“apparence”? Ce n’est certainement pas l’opposé d’un “être” quelconque – que puis-je énoncer de cet être, si ce n’est les attributs de son apparence? Ce n’est certes pas un masque inanimé que l’on pourrait mettre, et peut-être même enlever, à un X inconnu! L’apparence est pour moi la vie et l’action elle-même qui, dans son ironie de soi-même, va jusqu’à me faire sentir qu’il y a là apparence et feu follet et danse des elfes et rien de plus – que, parmi ces rêveurs, moi aussi, moi “qui cherche la connaissance”, je danse le pas de tout le monde, que le “connaissant” est un moyen pour prolonger la danse terrestre, et qu’en raison de cela il fait partie de ces maîtres de cérémonie de la vie et que la sublime conséquence et le lien de toutes les connaissances sont et seront peut-être le moyen suprême d’assurer l’universalité de la rêverie et l’entente de tous ces rêveurs entre eux et, par cela même, de faire durer le rêve.» Ibid, par. 54. -/- N'est-ce pas dire, avec des mots sortis du fond des tripes, qu'il a découvert que la vie n'est qu'un jeu qui se joue de toute conscience qui s'illusionne "être", mais qu'il a pourtant décidé d'adhérer à ce jeu, parce que s'en détacher, ce serait retomber sous le charme d'une nouvelle illusion, l'illusion de se croire "être" celui qui aurait percé le jeu à jour, alors qu'y adhérer, tout en le perçant à jour, c'est enfin être vivant? Incandescence Nietzsche a mis dans sa recherche une intensité hors du commun. Et une honnêteté totale aussi. Lorsqu'on apporte une telle intensité et une telle honnêteté, on amène nécessairement son propre être à son point d'incandescence. Ce point d'incandescence, c'est la porte du néant. Mais selon que l'on s'agrippe alors à soi ou que l'on s'abandonne à ce qui vient, on bascule dans la lumière de l'éveil ou dans l'angoisse de sa propre solitude. Nietzsche a fait face au néant, mais autant que j'en aie compris, il ne s'est pas abandonné; il a au contraire adopté la position héroïque de celui qui tient bon, qui fait face et campe sur sa propre force. Cette position met en jeu des force intérieures considérables, qui donnent une clarté puissante à la conscience, mais qui oblige du même coup celle-ci à se supporter elle-même, à bouts de bras, sans possibilité de lâcher, sous peine de s'écrouler. Cette intensité reposant entièrement sur soi donne un sentiment de vertige, et si on insiste dans cette voie, on peut vraiment avoir l'impression de devenir fou. Car on se retrouve écartelé entre deux choix également impossibles: la surenchère infinie de sa propre puissance et l'anéantissement. Il me semble que Nietzsche a été extrêmement loin dans cette voie, jusqu'à ce que le fil casse. Dans ce sens – je le répète, ce n'est là que ma compréhension des choses – je partage l'avis de Jean-Marie et mushotoku-nad, en disant que Nietzsche n'aurait pas connu l'éveil tel qu'on l'entend ici. Il est resté sur le pas de la porte, refusant farouchement le lâcher-prise salvateur – qu'il aurait pris pour un aveu de faiblesse –, refusant de dire ces mots: "Que Ta volonté soit faite!", les mots par lesquels tout se trouve accompli, persistant au contraire à braver la tempête plutôt que d'accorder à Cela toute-puissance sur lui-même. Eternel retour Lorsqu’on vit un moment d’une totale intensité, on sent bien qu’on touche l’essence de l’être. A partir d’une certaine intensité, on débouche sur quelque chose de substantiel, quelque chose qui EST, et donc qui nécessairement dépasse le petit moi. Simplement, dans un cas comme celui-ci, on reste convaincu qu’il s’agit d’un état d’exception. On a touché l’éveil, la réalité de l’être, mais on n’y est pas entré. Y entrer, c’est réaliser que ce moment que l’on vit comme un état d’exception a en fait toujours été là, que ce n’est véritablement pas un moment d’exception, mais notre vraie nature, la nature de ce qui EST, et que l’état d’exception c’est celui d’en être séparé parce qu’on s’identifie à une illusion. Tant qu’on n’a pas réalisé cela, on croira nécessairement que les seuls instants vrais de notre vie sont ces instants d’exception durant lesquels on communie à l’être, et que tout le reste est sans valeur. C’est dans ce sens que je comprends la théorie de l’éternel retour de Nietzsche, qui pour moi a toujours eu un caractère angoissant. Revivre éternellement le retour du même. Ou plus précisément, car c’est cela qu’entendait Nietzsche, revivre éternellement le retour de ces moments d’exception, ces seuls moments réels. Car du moment qu’on pense qu’eux seuls sont réels, qu’eux seuls sont enracinés dans l’être éternel, l’évidence s’impose que d’une part ils ne sauraient disparaître, et que d’autre part tout le reste ne saurait avoir d'existence réelle. Et donc que l'éternité est faite de ces moments d'exceptions, qu'elle est faite de l'éternel retour de ceux-ci. (shrink)

Photo ID 222412412 © US Navy Medicine | Dreamstime.com ABSTRACT In a non-military setting, the answer is clear: it would be unethical to treat someone based on non-medical considerations such as nationality. We argue that Battlefield Triage is a moral tragedy, meaning that it is a situation in which there is no morally blameless decision and that the demands of justice cannot be satisfied. INTRODUCTION Medical resources in an austere environment without quick recourse for resupply or casualty evacuation are often (...) limited. The shortage extends not only to supplies like blood products and drugs, but physicians and other medical personnel. In the midst of a mass casualty scenario, such as a battle that includes intense ground fighting, the medical staff will stretch scarce resources and triage casualties according to specific criteria. Typically, they proceed by providing care for the most severely wounded first, referred to here as conventional triage. At times, though, the staff may reverse the triage so that soldiers with minor wounds can return to the fight. In a mass casualty situation, when medical personnel apply conventional triage and treat casualties from opposing forces, a dilemma may arise. We argue that it can be permissible for military physicians to prioritize their own soldiers over enemy combatants in a mass casualty triage, where reverse triage does not apply. The case we will focus on is as follows: Battlefield Triage: During combat operations on a remote island in the Pacific Ocean, a compatriot soldier and an enemy combatant arrive at the compatriot soldier country’s medical treatment facility. Both have similar gunshot wounds to the abdomen, and they arrive with similar conditions. Both have low oxygen saturation and excessive blood loss. The sole physician only has enough time to stabilize one person. The scenario is brief, and we are aware that medical rules of eligibility will most often dictate how the physician proceeds,[1] but this scenario is useful in setting up the question we focus on in this paper: would it be wrong to favor the stabilization of a soldier just because the soldier is the physician’s compatriot? In other words, can nationality serve as an ethically justified tiebreaker in a situation such as Battlefield Triage?[2] In a non-military setting, the answer is clear: it would be unethical to treat someone based on non-medical considerations such as nationality. The AMA’s Code of Medical Ethics asserts that physicians have “ethical obligations to place patients’ welfare above their self-interest and above obligations to other groups.”[3] The World Medical Association’s Declaration of Tokyo affirms that “no motive, whether personal, collective or political, shall prevail against this higher purpose” of alleviating distress.[4] Physicians are taught early on that triage decisions must be medically indicated and made without consideration of factors such as race, ethnicity, religion, social status, and nationality. They are taught that public trust and obligations of justice grounded in equality demand that only medical indications be considered. But military physicians in a military setting are beholden to obligations, duties, and responsibilities as members of the military, and when these obligations, duties, and responsibilities conflict, as they do in Battlefield Triage, which loyalties win out and why?[5] Critics of partiality on national grounds argue that partiality undermines public trust in medicine and justice because everyone should be treated equally regardless of nationality.[6] Proponents of partiality argue that military obligations supersede equality and that justice requires partiality in such cases.[7] Despite the critics’ disagreement, both agree that there is a morally right, perhaps even blameless, course of action. Drawing on insights from virtue ethics, we argue that Battlefield Triage is a moral tragedy in which justice is unattainable and there is no action without moral cost. The assumption that there is a morally right choice is flawed. We argue that while no decision in this scenario is free from moral blame, there are reasons to favor treating one’s soldiers over enemy combatants. I. The Case Against Partiality There is a common assumption that there is a morally right or just decision in Battlefield Triage. A number of organizations and scholars claim that it is wrong for military physicians to favor their own soldiers on the grounds of nationality or some form of ‘group membership.’ (In a conflict involving service members from multiple nations working as a coalition, a soldier from an allied country may receive the same priority as the US service member due to ‘group membership.’) The World Medical Association’s WMA Declaration of Lisbon on the Rights of the Patient, which was reaffirmed in 2015, posits that, “[i]n circumstances where a choice must be made between potential patients for a particular treatment that is in limited supply, all such patients are entitled to a fair selection procedure for that treatment. That choice must be based on medical criteria and made without discrimination.”[8] This echoes what was set forth in Article 12 of the Geneva Conventions, which states that “[o]nly urgent medical reasons will authorize priority in the order of treatment to be administered.”[9] The argument for impartiality in Battlefield Triage is that every person is morally equal, and equality entails that medical distribution is, “based on a combination of medical need and urgency.”[10] This is in keeping with the bioethical principles that are generally applied.[11] II. The Case for Partiality On the other side, there are arguments that favoritism is the ethically right decision in Battlefield Triage.[12] The argument asserts that members of the military form a morally significant community of friends and participation in these relationships demands partiality. Just as parents have strong ethical duties to their children and not just any children, military personnel have ethical duties to their group, a group that involves an affirmation of mutual aid and support. Some have termed these ‘associative duties. According to Michael Gross, obligations of friendship, care, and solidarity “leave very little room for generally applicable principles of justice that would obligate a medic to treat enemy or non-compatriot wounded ahead of their compatriots.”[13] This is true in Battlefield Triage, but it may also be true even if the enemy’s soldier were more seriously wounded: “the ethics of small group cohesion, largely an ethics of care, mostly replaces the demands of impartial justice.”[14] In a more recent article, Gross explains that preferential treatment is ethically justified based on fighting capability and “the special obligations people owe friends, family, and, no less, comrades-in-arms.”[15] To not show partiality to the US soldier would be morally wrong on the grounds of friendship and mutual care.[16] III. The Moral Tragedy of Battlefield Triage Defenders and critics of Battlefield Triage favoritism based on nationality both frame their position as just or fair. For example, Justin List argues that physicians are “bound to practice medical neutrality,”[17] Marcus Adams denies that physicians “possess special ethical obligations” to enemy combatants because of their profession.[18] These perspectives assume that there is a morally right decision and that justice is attainable. The assumption that there is or can be a morally right Battlefield Triage decision, and we need to put our heads together to figure it out, remains strongly entrenched. However, the facts of the situation should give us pause; there are too many people and too few resources, and this demands a decision-making process that determines who will receive scarce resources. By its very nature, a battlefield triage decision has to be made based on some characteristic or value, a characteristic or value that will inevitably favor some at the expense of others. This is precisely why competing analyses “in the military context struggle to resolve these conflicts satisfactorily.”[19] Drawing on the insights of virtue ethics, we suggest that Battlefield Triage is a moral tragedy. Virtue ethics suggests that morality is about acting virtuously, which is to say that we should do what a virtuous person would do in the situation. Ethics is about figuring out how a just, wise, compassionate, loving, and fair person would act, and then doing that, as one grows in virtue. But life is not always clear cut, and it is possible that virtuous people may find themselves in a moral tragedy, a situation in which, through no fault of one’s own, a person must make a morally objectionable decision. After the action the virtuous person “emerges having done a terrible thing, the very sort of thing that the callous, dishonest, unjust, or in general vicious agent would characteristically do.”[20] Stated differently, a moral tragedy presents a virtuous person with two or more courses of action, all of which have a moral cost.[21] In Battlefield Triage, no matter how the physician goes about deciding, there is going to be defensible concern from those not saved. The fact that there are more people than can be helped fosters competing values in battlefield triage: maximize lives saved, treat people equally, treat the worse off, and support the war effort. Treating people equally may create tension between treating the worse off, maximizing lives saved, and supporting the war effort. Reverse triage is a case in point, as supporting the war effort conflicts with treating the worse off first, as is a fair lottery system since deploying a lottery may not maximize lives saved or support the war effort. There can be reasons why one person is selected over another, to be sure. Yet, there are reasons for making a decision, and that the decision is subject to legitimate moral concern is another. To recognize the moral tragedy of Battlefield Triage is to recognize the impossibility of acting blamelessly in the situation. In this situation, the virtuous military physician is going to have to sacrifice important values such as justice, compassion, and respect for others, even with a defensible criterion in hand. The physician will grieve this sacrifice accordingly. The physician may find her decision difficult or stressful, and rightly so, because of what her circumstances require of her. This kind of moral tragedy results “in actions which betray and violate the rights of persons to whom there may be a strong duty of care. When this happens, it properly triggers an appropriate moral emotion since our moral integrity has been violated and this affects how we think of ourselves and what we have become.”[22] Rather than view her triage decision as the morally superior choice, the virtuous military physician will view her decisions in these circumstances in a different light: it is the least bad option in a terrible situation, and she did something ethically problematic, something that is contrary to her moral character. She deeply regrets the circumstances in which she had to act. IV. Virtue Ethics A virtue ethicist has insight into how one should go about deciding what to do in a moral tragedy, although virtue ethics may not be as helpful as one may hope. The goal of the virtuous military physician in Battlefield Triage is to adopt the best course of action or the action that she feels she ought to do, all things considered. This does not make her choice devoid of serious wrongdoing—a decision must be made, but that does not make it just. The virtuous military physician will approach the situation with courage, responsibility, and insight. She will think about the decision carefully, wisely, and conscientiously; she will weigh the goods and harms of the choices before her, in conjunction with a proper conception of the good life, human worth, and understanding of her obligations to others—including chain of command, fellow soldiers, and the medical community. She is attuned to the value of human life and has a reasonable idea of the various ways her decisions will affect others. She recognizes that she is in this non-ideal situation through no fault of her own: she is not the one fighting in battles; she is serving her country as a physician, whose job it is to save lives, treat everyone justly, and promote military objectives. She regrets the decision she is forced to make in battlefield triage, acting “with immense regret and pain,” Hursthouse explains, “instead of indifferently or gladly.”[23] This is because, no matter what decision is made, the virtuous military physician “does something terrible or horrible,” something she otherwise would not do and is contrary to her values.[24] V. A Resolvable Moral Tragedy Instead of asking whether there is a morally right decision, in which a decision is morally blameless and above reproach, the virtue ethicist asks whether there is a decision with a convincing rationale, knowing that a decision can have a clear rationale but still be morally tragic. It is perfectly reasonable to think that different virtuous persons will arrive at different courses of action: “two virtuous agents, in the same situation,” Hursthouse writes, “may act differently” in irresolvable moral tragedies, in cases in which there is no clear course of action.[25] Because a person must act in a moral tragedy, one goal is to identify reasons for choosing the chosen action. Some decisions are clearly indefensible—treating neither the compatriot soldier nor the enemy combatant in Battlefield Triage would be wrong—and some decisions are more problematic than others. If the military physician selects to treat the soldier because she does not like the enemy combatant’s skin color, such a reason would be deeply problematic. But much of the debate over how to act in a moral tragedy is not over clearly indefensible or problematic criteria. Instead, the literature is largely about different standards or implementations of justice. Some scholars defend nation-impartial triage as right, while others defend nation-aware triage as right, and each argues that the other side is promoting an unjust or otherwise wrong solution to Battlefield Triage. We suggest that Battlefield Triage is a resolvable moral tragedy and that virtue ethics offers convincing reasons to prefer the treatment of the compatriot soldier rather than the enemy combatant on the grounds of national identity. Virtues are integral to living a good life, a flourishing life, but as Aristotle observed long ago, human beings are inherently social, interdependent and interconnected in profound ways.[26] This goes beyond the obvious fact that we need each other to survive day to day (one person makes clothes, another farms, and another makes tools); the claim is that a good or flourishing life depends in large part on one’s social network or community. This is why many of Aristotle’s moral virtues are other facing: justice, friendship, generosity, and magnanimity, to name a few. Courage, a typically self-facing virtue, is understood by Aristotle to be the virtue that regards one’s fear of death in battle, a battle fought on behalf of one’s city.[27] All of this remains true today. Namely, there is an important sense in which our community matters to our lives: it is easier to live a good, flourishing life if one is part of a good, flourishing community. Our community is made up of smaller groups, and it is more accurate to say that we are simultaneous members of different groups within a broader community. A person may be part of a family, friend group, research team, large state university, city, state, and nation. Groups can function well or not, as we all have experienced, and this suggests that there are virtues or excellences that groups can instantiate. Good groups are unified in purpose, with each member doing their duty alongside others for the attainment of that purpose. Good groups manifest solidarity among their members. Although Aristotle does not list solidarity as a virtue, a number of modern-day virtue ethicists have begun examining how group solidarity can be a virtue that contributes to a good or flourishing life.[28] Solidarity is not conceptualized as an individual virtue, a virtue possessed by a person in isolation of others; instead, it is a collective virtue, a virtue that is shared among members of a defined group with particular ends.[29] “A group has solidarity to the extent that its members are disposed to: (1) share values, aims, or goals; (2) care about those values, aims, or goals; (3) act in accordance with those values, aims, or goals; (4) trust the testimony of other group members with respect to those values, aims, and goals; and (5) feel a sense of belonging to the group.”[30] The virtue of collective or group solidarity involves individuals having special concern for each other, shared aims and values, trust, loyalty, and a sense of belonging with these specific others. There is a oneness to the group in the pursuit of a definite goal or purpose, involving mutual support and affirmation of each member. As such, the group has ends and goods above and beyond the good of each individual person. Sometimes solidarity requires personal sacrifice for the collective (for example, a father sacrificing food so his child can eat). The virtue of collective or group solidarity is important to the military and medical community at every level, and for clear reasons. In the military, there is a clear hierarchy of command, unity of purpose and end, mutual trust and support in complex settings, and so on. Soldiers need to know they can count on one another, and solidarity grounds a soldier’s ability to trust others and be assured of mutual aid. In medicine, solidarity maintains self-regulation of the profession, shared values and goals, as well as public support, not to mention that day-to-day operations require physician trust, engagement, and effort toward the ends of clinical care. Physicians need to work together, along with others, in pursuit of health, and disunity is sowed when there is mistrust, selfishness, or disengagement among the healthcare team and organization. Importantly, just as we are all members of various groups and hence may manifest group solidarity in different settings, the virtuous military physician instantiates collective solidarity with both the medical profession and the military. Her dual loyalty contributes to the moral difficulty of acting in Battlefield Triage. The military physician has competing obligations to distinct groups and cannot satisfy all obligations in Battlefield Triage. Solidarity with the military supports the consideration of favoring the soldier for reasons of national identity, whereas solidarity with the medical community does not. Something has to give, which is why it is a moral tragedy. The virtuous military physician, therefore, must weigh the costs of each course of action. To fulfill her obligations to the medical community would require that she does not use nationality and other non-medical considerations in Battlefield Triage. Since the soldier and enemy combatant are equally injured, justice would demand a random process, perhaps a flip of the coin. Although this may satisfy obligations the military physician has to the medical community, this would be costly to the physician’s military group. If word gets out that the physician decides who to treat based on a coin toss, soldiers, families, and citizens may become frustrated and angry. Soldier morale may go down if it becomes known that a coin flip led to the preventable death of a soldier and the saving of an enemy combatant who had killed (or attempted to kill) other soldiers. As Gross highlights, military solidarity involves a mutual aid promise that military personnel promise to help one another.[31] A military physician is part of the military and, as such, is part of the mutual aid promise, which would appear to be violated if the physician flips a coin. Treating a member of one’s own team may be psychologically more beneficial than treating an enemy combatant and may lead to less moral distress.[32] Finally, treating soldiers rather than enemy combatants promotes broader military and social aims, including returning soldiers to health, maintaining unity of purpose, and minimizing community suffering from a soldier’s death. Favoring members of one’s group, that is, triage based on nationality in Battlefield Triage, would fulfill obligations of military group loyalty, which is contrary to the values and duties of medicine. It does not seem as though showing favoritism in this particular situation is very costly to the medical community or general public, but this is because there is recognition that the physician is in the military. Medicine is impartial to non-medical indications partly because of fairness and to promote public trust in medicine. However, Battlefield Triage is unique, as medicine is being practiced in a non-public, wartime setting. In ordinary circumstances, a patient’s identity is irrelevant, and physicians ought not play favorites. Since Battlefield Triage is not an ordinary circumstance, decisions based on patient identity may not undermine public trust in medicine. In addition, it is contestable that fairness in Battlefield Triage requires that no consideration be paid to one’s nationality. Fairness is about giving each person their due, what is owed to them, and the case can be made that soldiers who place themselves in danger for the sake of the common good or a just cause are owed special attention when they suffer harm in the line of duty. In other words, soldiers voluntarily undergo risk to themselves for the greater good, and society owes them for this sacrifice. This plausibly includes preferential treatment in a situation such as Battlefield Triage. So, while the medical community affirms justice demands non-preferential treatment, the military community can affirm the opposite. The demands of fairness are unclear at best or in conflict in this situation: demands of physician justice decry favoritism, while demands of military justice support favoritism. Triage not based on nationality is arguably unfair and triage based on nationality may not undermine public trust, after all. All things considered, there is a clear rationale for favoring nationality-based preferential treatment in Battlefield Triage. Adopting a nationality-based preference in this situation is more defensible than not. This does not make such a decision ethically right or just. Preference based on nationality is the least bad decision, but it is not morally blameless. It involves one in a serious moral wrong, a wrong otherwise avoided and contrary to one’s character. The virtuous military physician is in a situation in which obligations conflict, and we disagree with Gross, who posits that care of fellow soldiers “is important to the near exclusion of all else.”[33] Gross fails to appreciate the collective virtue of solidarity as applied to those in medicine. The military physician has duties to fellow soldiers but also to fellow physicians, to the medical community, and humanity. To favor a soldier on grounds of nationality violates her duties and responsibilities to this latter group. She is involved in a moral tragedy and can only seek the most just action given the circumstances, yet, at least in virtue ethics, the action remains far from blameless. CONCLUSION We argue that Battlefield Triage is a moral tragedy, meaning that it is a situation in which there is no morally blameless decision and that the demands of justice cannot be satisfied. As such, the virtuous military physician incurs a moral cost to acting as she does—there is a moral residue. However, despite being a moral tragedy, there are clear reasons to act in favor of treating one’s own, considering group solidarity. As such, these kinds of tragedies are resolvable: virtuous military physicians should favor treatment of their own, although they would do so with sorrow. - [1] Militaries set forth medical rules of eligibility or guidelines used to determine whether a person qualifies for specific medical interventions or treatments in certain circumstances, and these guidelines are binding for a military physician. For example, despite opposition from medical organizations, militaries have adopted reverse triage guidelines for military physicians to follow. For ethical discussion, see Falzone, Elisabeth, P. Pasquier, C. Hoffmann, O. Barbier, M. Boutonnet, A. Salvadori, A. Jarrassier, J. Renner, B. Malgras, and S. Mérat. "Triage in military settings." Anaesthesia Critical Care & Pain Medicine 36, no. 1 (2017): 43-51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.accpm.2016.05.004 [2] There are issues that are related to this, including the triage of civilians and allied soldiers. We set related issues aside for purposes of this paper [3] American Medical Association, Code of Medical Ethics: Current Opinions with Annotations, 2004–2005 ed. (Chicago, IL: AMA, 2004), 300. [4] American Medical Association, Code of Medical Ethics: Current Opinions with Annotations, 2004–2005 ed. (Chicago, IL: AMA, 2004), 300. [5] This is termed the “dual loyalty” dilemma in military medicine and has been described at length elsewhere: Institute of Medicine (US) Board on Health Sciences Policy. Military Medical Ethics: Issues regarding Dual Loyalties: Workshop Summary. Washington (DC): National Academies Press (US); 2008. Toward a Framework for Resolving Dual Loyalties. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK214853/ [6] See Kenneth G. Swan and K.G. Swan, Jr., “Triage: The Past Revisited,” Military Medicine 161:8 (1996): 448–452. https://doi.org/10.1093/milmed/161.8.448; Jerome A. Singh, “American Physicians and dual loyalty obligations in the ‘war on terror,’” BMC Medical Ethics 4.4 (2003): 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6939-4-4; Beam, Thomas E. "Medical Ethics on the Battlefield." Military Medical Ethics: Sect. IV. Medical ethics in the military. Medical ethics on the battlefield: the crucible of military medical ethics 2 (2003): 369-402; Hereth, Blake. "Health justice for unjust combatants." Journal of Military Ethics 20, no. 1 (2021): 67-81. https://doi.org/10.1080/15027570.2021.1949782. [7] See Adams, Marcus P. "Triage priorities and military physicians." In Physicians at war: The dual-loyalties challenge, pp. 215-236. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands, 2008. Gross, Michael L. "Comradery, community, and care in military medical ethics." Theoretical medicine and bioethics 32 (2011): 337-350. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11017-011-9189-6. Gross, Michael L. "The limits of impartial medical treatment during armed conflict." In Military medical ethics for the 21st century, pp. 71-84. Routledge, 2016. [8] World Medical Association, WMA Declaration of Lisbon on the Rights of the Patient. 5 December 2022, https://www.wma.net/policies-post/wma-declaration-of-lisbon-on-the-rights-of-the-patient/ [9] Geneva Convention for the Amelioration of the Condition of Wounded, Sick in Armed Forces in the Field. 12 August 1949. https://www.un.org/en/genocideprevention/documents/atrocity-crimes/Doc.30_GC-I-EN.pdf. [10] List, Justin M. "Medical neutrality and political activism: physicians' roles in conflict situations." In Physicians at war: The dual-loyalties challenge, pp. 237-253. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands, 2008. 240 [11] Beauchamp, T., and J. Childress. 2013. Principles of Biomedical Ethics, 7th ed. Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press. [12] Adams, Marcus P. "Triage priorities and military physicians." In Physicians at war: The dual-loyalties challenge, pp. 215-236. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands, 2008. [13] Gross, "Comradery, community, and care in military medical ethics," 347. [14] Gross, “Comradery, community, and care in military medical ethics,” 349. [15] Gross, Michael L. "When medical ethics and military ethics collide." Narrative inquiry in bioethics 13, no. 3 (2023): 199-204. 202 https://dx.doi.org/10.1353/nib.2023.a924191 [16] Our argument draws on virtue ethics, from which care ethics derives, and it is worth clarifying how our argument relates to Gross’s. We do not think that the virtue of friendship grounds triage decisions, for we think it is unlikely that the physician and wounded soldier are friends. Instead, as explained below, we think the collective virtue of group solidarity better captures the moral significance of group loyalty and that Gross would agree with us. But since military physicians are part of distinct groups, with competing obligations, the military physician will be forced to sacrifice a value in battlefield triage cases. In other words, we think Gross downplays the dual group membership of a military physician. [17] List,”Medical neutrality and political activism,” 250. [18] Adams,”Triage priorities and military physicians,” 235. [19] London, Leslie, Leonard S. Rubenstein, Laurel Baldwin-Ragaven, and Adriaan Van Es. "Dual loyalty among military health professionals: human rights and ethics in times of armed conflict." Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 15, no. 4 (2006): 381-391. 383. [20] Hursthouse, R. On Virtue Ethics. OUP 1999. 74 [21] Nussbaum, Martha C. "The costs of tragedy: Some moral limits of cost-benefit analysis." The Journal of Legal Studies 29, no. S2 (2000): 1005-1036, 1007. [22] De Wijze, S. (2005). Tragic-remorse–the anguish of dirty hands. Ethical theory and moral practice, 7(5), 453-471, 457. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10677-005-6836-x [23] Hursthouse, 73 [24] Hursthouse, 81 [25] Hursthouse, 72 [26] Aristotle, Politics 1253a8. Reeve, C. D. C., Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Co., 2017 [27] Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics. III.6.114a, 34-35. 2002, Nicomachean Ethics, Christopher Rowe (trans.), Oxford: Oxford University Press [28] Byerly, T. Ryan, and Meghan Byerly. "Collective virtue." The Journal of Value Inquiry 50, no. 1 (2016): 33-50. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10790-015-9484-y; Federico, Veronica. "Conclusion: solidarity as a public virtue." Solidarity as a Public Virtue (2018): 495-542. https://doi.org/10.5771/9783845290058. Rehg, William. "Solidarity and the common good: An analytic framework." Journal of Social Philosophy 38, no. 1 (2007): 7-21. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9833.2007.00363.x [29] Byerly and Byerly. "Collective virtue." 43 [30] Battaly, Heather. "Solidarity: Virtue or vice?." In Social virtue epistemology, pp. 303-324. Routledge, 2022. 304 [31] Ibid., 2011: 341 [32] It might be thought that displaying altruism by helping an enemy combatant at the expense of one’s fellow soldier may be psychologically satisfiying. For evidence that military physicians find it difficult to treat enemy combatants, see Lundberg, Kristina, Sofia Kjellström, Anders Jonsson, and Lars Sandman. "Experiences of Swedish military medical personnel in combat zones: adapting to competing loyalties." Military medicine 179, no. 8 (2014): 821-826. https://doi.org/10.7205/MILMED-D-14-00038. Lamblin, Antoine, Clément Derkenne, Marion Trousselard, and Marie-Ange Einaudi. "Ethical challenges faced by French military doctors deployed in the Sahel (Operation Barkhane): a qualitative study." BMC Medical Ethics 22 (2021): 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12910-021-00723-2 [33] Ibid., 2011: 344. (shrink)

What does it mean to give a "gift"? In this timely collection, distinguished anthropologists--Maurice Godelier, George Marcus, Stephen Tyler--and philosophers--Mark C. Taylor, John D. Caputo, Jean-Joseph Goux and Adriaan Peperzak, explore an enigma that has disturbed contemporary philosophers from Marcel Mauss to Jacques Derrida.The essays included in the volume: Some Things You Give, Some Things You Sell, But Some Things You Must Keep for Yourselves: What Mauss Did Not Say about Sacred Objects by Maurice Godelie.The Gift and Globalization: A (...) Prolegomenon to the Anthropological Study of Contemporary Finance Capital and Its Mentalities by George MarcusCapitalizing (on) Gifting by Mark C. Taylor"Even Steven" or "No Strings Attached" by Stephen TylerMothering, Co-muni-cation and the Gifts of Language by Genevieve VaughanThe Time of Giving, the Time of Forgiving by John D. CaputoSeneca against Derrida: Gift and Alterity by Jean-Joseph Goux Giving by Adriaan Peperzak. (shrink)

Although Sartre denounces Descartes' two principles, he nevertheless draws inspiration from him. No doubt this is close to being paradoxical; we shall have to be no less paradoxical in our explanation. For although the text entitled “Cartesian Freedom,” which introduces a volume of selections from Descartes, , confers some coherence on this apparent non-sense, once the texts surrounding this work have been taken into account, we have to conclude not only that this text predates , even though it was published (...) afterwards, but that it is a collection of Descartes' writings on Sartre, even though it is a writing by Sartre on Descartes. For beyond the Sartrean analysis of the Cartesian analyses of the , we find Sartre's existential psychoanalysis of his predecessor, in which takes place not a transference, but a counter-transference. French S'il déclame contre les deux principes qui sont ceux de Descartes, Sartre se réclame pourtant de lui. Sans doute n'est-il pas à un paradoxe près. Reste qu'il nous faudra ne pas l'être moins pour expliquer le sien. Car certes, le sens du texte qu'il intitule « La li berté cartésienne » et qui articule ce volume de morceaux choisis qu'est Descartes 1596-1650 confère quelque cohérence à cet apparent non-sens. Mais une fois présenté de cette œuvre le paratexte, il nous faudra affirmer non seulement que celle-ci se lit avant L'être et le néant quoiqu'elle ait été publiée après, mais, plus encore, qu'elle est un ensemble d'écrits de Descartes sur Sartre quoiqu'elle soit un écrit de Sartre sur Descartes. C'est qu'outre l'analyse sartrienne des analyses cartésiennes de la Méditation quatrième , on y trouve une psychanalyse existentielle par l'auteur de son devancier, à l'occasion de laquelle a lieu non pas un transfert, mais un contre-transfert. (shrink)

La quatrième de couverture indique : Deleuze et Guattari étaient des lecteurs sans pareils. C'est la raison pour laquelle Alain Jugnon les lit dans ce livre ; plus précisément, il lit avec eux Artaud et Kafka, Lacan et Klossowski, Büchner et Nietzsche. N'ont-ils pas assez lu Lautréamont ; il les lit pour eux, comme eux l'auraient lu, l'ajoutant à leurs lectures, avec les outils qu'ils ont créés pour lire. Nul mieux qu'Alain Jugnon n'articule les lectures nécessaires à la défaite de (...) ce monde-ci et au surgissement d'un monde transformé : "Deleuze et Guattari ont commencé à dire dans leur livre premier, L'Anti-Oedipe : il n'y a plus de dialectique à penser ou bien d'histoires à raconter, mais il y aura des machines capitalistes et des machines désirantes, des guerres des sexes et des guerres des races, des combats de rue et des révolutions de palais, il y aura tout ça et plus encore, qui fera une bible humaine à revendre ou bien une philosophie populaire à inventer pour demain." (A.J.). (shrink)

[es] La muerte violenta del sabio Abū Marwān al-Ṭubnī en 457/1065 despertó una gran curiosidad dadas las circunstancias excepcionales en las que se produjo: al-Ṭubnī fue encontrado muerto en su lecho, atravesado por más de sesenta puñaladas, recayendo sobre los miembros de su propia familia, que vivían en diversas partes de la casa, las principales sospechas. Basado en una serie de fuentes historiográficas y jurídicas, este artículo reconstruye las investigaciones llevadas a cabo por las autoridades policiales así como las discusiones (...) de los juristas sobre los castigos a aplicar. Estos datos permiten analizar las relaciones en el seno de una familia, relaciones cuya complejidad podría explicar la violencia de la que fue objeto el patriarca.[fr] La mort violente du savant Abū Marwān al-Ṭubnī en 457/1065 éveilla la curiosité vu les circonstances exceptionnelles de son décès: on l'avait retrouvé dans son lit, percé de plus de soixante coups de poignard, et c'est vers les membres de sa famille, qui vivaient dans diverses parties de la maison, que se portèrent les soupçons. Basé sur un ensemble de sources historiographiques et juridiques, cet article reconstitue les enquêtes menées par les autorités policières et les discussions des juristes sur les peines à infliger. Ces données permettent d'analyser les relations au sein d'une famille, relations dont la complexité peuvent expliquer cette violence contre le patriarche. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Reviewed by:Interpreting a Classic: Demosthenes and His Ancient CommentatorsK. KapparisCraig A. Gibson. Interpreting a Classic: Demosthenes and His Ancient Commentators. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 2002. xii + 261 pp. Cloth, $55.This book aims to provide a comprehensive account of the ancient scholarship on Demosthenes. Gibson points out that Demosthenes was widely read in later antiquity, and this created the need for linguistic and historical commentaries (...) on his speeches. Of these, some have partially survived on papyrus, while excerpts have also been preserved in later lexicographers and the Byzantine scholia found in the margins of Demosthenic manuscripts. The purpose of Gibson's study is to clarify some confusing and difficult issues related to the ancient scholarship on Demosthenes and to provide the text and commentary on the main sources. [End Page 481]Gibson's introduction includes an informative outline of key parameters in the debate, such as the accuracy of excerption from an ancient commentary, the significance of date and place, and the intended readership of these commentaries. The first chapter discusses the form and transmission of ancient commentaries, their relation with lexicographic works, and their impact on the Byzantine scholia. Gibson convincingly argues that the scholia do not reveal direct dependency upon the surviving ancient commentaries but were compiled from lexicographic works such as Harpocration or the Suda, and possibly other works lost for us. The second chapter deals with the sources, critical agenda, and readership of the ancient commentaries. Here, Gibson provides a clear account of the purposes and guiding principles behind the composition of these works. He concludes that ancient commentators were familiar with interpretative problems of the Demosthenic text and tried to explain allusions and references to specific events, people, and places and also provide semantic, etymological and textual explanations of difficult or unusual terms. In this and the third chapter, Gibson discusses in considerable detail the scholarship on Didymus. He rejects the view that Didymus was merely a filter for a "golden era" of Alexandrian scholarship and argues that his prominent position as a commentator is due to the vast quantity of his work and its impact on later scholars. In sum, the first part of the study offers an informative account of ancient Demosthenic scholarship written in a clear and accessible style.The second part of the book contains the texts of ancient commentators of Demosthenes, with English translations, and also linguistic and historical commentary. In the translation, Gibson chooses to leave out many lines from the papyrus texts where only single words or fragments of words are legible; he translates only the most extant sections of the text. This is a valid choice, but readers should be aware of the fact that many important details may be hiding in the leftovers and fragments that have been omitted. Gibson does not provide the readily available text of P.Berol.inv. 9780, the most extensive surviving work of Didymus, while he cites the rest of the texts from reliable modern editions. In the commentary there are interesting discussions on the Spartan mora, the building of the Parthenon, the Helliastic courts, and many other topics noted by the ancient commentators on Demosthenes. An appendix presents and discusses P.Lond.Lit. 179, a prologue and commentary on Dem. 21. The reader will probably find useful the indexes and rich bibliography provided in the last part of this study.Gibson's commentary is certainly thorough but contains a number of errors in detail, and important bibliography is missing on individual topics. For example:Page 113: Gibson adopts the text of Pearson-Stephens. The adjective is, or, as here (later Greek),. Therefore the text should be (see LSJ s.v.).Page 120: Gibson has missed several important contributions to the issue of the theoric fund in recent years (M. H. Hansen, GRBS 17 [1976] 235-46; E. M. [End Page 482] Harris in E. M. Harris and R. Wallace, eds., Transitions to Empire: Essays in Greco-Roman History 360-146 B.C., in Honor of E. Badian [Norman, Okla., 1996]; C. Carey, Apollodoros Against Neaira [Warminster, 1992] 152-57). As a result, his note on P.Berol. 9780, Col. 8.32-44 is... (shrink)

From the beginning, the implications of quantum theory for our most general understanding of the world have been a matter of intense debate. Einstein argues that the theory had to be regarded as fundamentally incomplete. Its inability, for example, to predict the exact time of decay of a single radioactive atom had to be due to a failure of the theory and not due to a permanent inability on our part or a fundamental indeterminism in nature itself. In 1964, John (...) Bell derived a theorem which showed that any deterministic theory which preserved locality would have certain consequences for measurements performed at a distance from one another. An experimental check seems to show that these consequences are not, in fact, realized. The correlation between the sets of events is much stronger than any local deterministic theory could allow. What is more, this stronger correlation is precisely that which is predicted by quantum theory. The astonishing result is that local deterministic theories of the classical sort seem to be permanently excluded. Not only can the individual decay not be predicted, but no future theory can ever predict it. The contributors in this volume wrestle with this conclusion. Some welcome it; others leave open a return to at lease some kind of deterministic world, one which must however allow something like action-at-a distance. How much lit it? And how can one avoid violating relativity theory, which excludes action-at-a-distance? How can a clash between the two fundamental theories of modern physics, relativity and quantum theory, be avoided? What are the consequences for the traditional philosophic issue of causality explanation and objectivity? One thing is certain; we can never return to the comfortable Newtonian world where everything that happened was, in principle, predictable and where what happened at one measurement site could not affect another set of measurements being performed light-years away, at a distance that a light-signal could not bridge. Contributors: James T. Cushing, Abner Shimony, N. David Mermin, Jon P. Jarrett, Linda Wessels, Bas C. van Fraassen, Jeremy Butterfield, Michael L. G. Redhead, Henry P. Stapp, Arthur Fine, R. I. G. Hughes, Paul Teller, Don Howard, Henry J. Folse, and Ernan McMullin. (shrink)

D'ordinaire, pour un philosophe, entreprendre d'écrire une morale, c'est se préparer à mourir dans son lit. Mais Cavaillès, au moment même où il faisait tout ce qu'on peut faire quand on veut mourir au combat, composait une logique. Il a donné ainsi sa morale, sans avoir à la rédiger.

Dans ce séminaire qui s'adresse à tous et ne suppose rien, Marc Crépon lit et nous fait lire Le Monolinguisme de l'autre un texte bref, paradoxal et terriblement actuel de Jacques Derrida. Il s'agit, tout compte fait, de 'l'enjeu politique de ce temps': comment défendre la différence linguistique, celle du français comme celle du moldave ou de l'ukrainien, sans céder au nationalisme? Je n'ai qu'une langue, écrit Jacques Derrida, et ce n'est pas la mienne. Il faut comprendre comment et pourquoi (...) 'une langue, ça n'appartient pas'. À partir de ce constat: l'identité, telle que fantasmée et revendiquée par certains discours nationalistes, est une fiction, Marc Crépon propose une éthique et une politique du dire, de l'écrire, du traduire."--Page 4 of cover. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:162. THE HUME LITERATURE FOR 1979 The Hume literature from 1925 to 1976 has been thoroughly covered in my book Fifty Years of Hume Scholarship : A Bibliographical Guide (Edinburgh University Press, 1978; ¿J 5. 50), which also lists the main earlier writings on Hume. Publications of the years 1977 and 1978 were listed in Hume Studies for the last two Novembers. What follows here will bring the record (...) up to the end of 1979. Readers are invited to inform me of any omissions, and to send me offprints of their own articles. The intention is to maintain a complete bibliographical record of critical work on Hume, by the regular publication in Hume Studies of an annual bibliography covering the previous year, with addenda consisting of items omitted through ignorance in previous years. References to recentlyappearing reviews (of books from earlier lists) are given at the end. The following abbreviations of journal titles are used here: APQ American Philosophical Quarterly JHI Journal of the History of Ideas JHP Journal of the History of Philosophy JP Journal of Philosophy PAS Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society PB Philosophical Books PQ Philosophical Quarterly PR Philosophical Review RIP Revue Internationale de Philosophie RM Review of Metaphysics TLS Times Literary Supplement Other abbreviations should be obvious enough, and mainly follow the British Standard (no. 4148). AIKEN, H. D. 'An Interpretation of Hume's Theory of the Place of Reason in Ethics and Polities', Ethics 90, 66-80. 163. ARDAO, A. 'Hume en Latinoamerica', Revista Venezolana de Fil., 143-6. BAIER, A. 'Hume on Heaps and Bundles', APQ 16, 285-96. BAIER, A. 'Good Men's Women: Hume on Chastity and Trust', Hume Studies 5, 1-19. BATTERSBY, C. 'Hume, Newton and "the Hill called Difficulty "', in S. C Brown, Philosophers of the Enlightenment (Royal Inst. Phil. Lectures, 12), 31-55. BATTERSBY, C. 'The Dialogues as Original Imitation: Cicero and the Nature of Hume's Skepticism', in D. F. Norton et al., McGiIl Hume Studies, 239-52. BEAUCHAMP, T. L. 'Self Inconsistency or Mere Self Perplexity ', Hume Studies 5, 37-44. BECK, L. W.? Prussian Hume and a Scottish Kant' in D. F. Norton et al.,· op. cit., 63-78. (repr. of 1978 paper. ) BELL, A. 'Some Spurious Hume Documents', Notes & Queries 26, 561. BIRO, J. I. 'Hume's Difficulties with the Self, Hume Studies 5, 45-54. BRANDT, R. 'David Hume: Neuere Bücher, Vorträge, Aufsätze', Philosophische Rundschau 26, 187-97. BROWN, S. C. 'The "Principle" of Natural Order: o£ What the Enlightened Sceptics did not doubt', in S. C. Brown [see BATTERSBY], 56-76. BUTT, J. The Mid-Eighteenth Century, 222-8, 312-14, 354-7. (The Oxf. Hist, of Eng. Lit., 8.) Oxford. CAPALDI, N. 'The Problem of Hume and Hume's Problem', introduction to D. F. Norton et al., op. cit., 3-21. CASULLO, A. 'Reid and Mill on Hume's maxim of conceivability ', Analysis 39, 212-19. CLARK, L. M. G. & LANGE, L. The Sexism of Social and Political Theory. Toronto"^ (includes reprints of Burns 1976 and Lacoste 1976) CONNON, R. W. 'The Naturalism of Hume Revisited', in D. F. Norton et al., op. cit. 121-45. COTTLE, C E. 'Justice as Artificial Virtue in Hume's Treatise', JHI 40, 457-66. 164. CRAIG, E. J. David Hume: Eine Einführung. in seine Philosophie. (144 pp.) Frankfurt am Main. DAVIE, G. E. 'Berkeley, Hume, and the Central Problem of Scottish Philosophy', in D. F. Norton et al., op. cit., 43-62. DEL BARCO COLLAZOS, J. L. 'Sobre la teoría de la imaginaci ón en la filosofía de Hume', Anuario filosofico 12, 131-43. DELEULE, D. Hume et la naissance du libéralisme économique. (400 pp.) Paris. FLEW, A. 'The Red Queen at Substraction? ', Hume Studies 5, 110-11. FORBES, D. 'Hume and the Scottish Enlightenment', in S. C Brown [see BATTERSBY], 94-109. GASKIN, J. C. A. 'Hume, Atheism, and the "Interested Obligation" of Morality', in D. F. Norton et al., op. cit., 147-59. GAUTHIER, D. 'David Hume, Contractarian', PR 88, 3-38. GAWLICK, G. 'Zwischen Empirizismus und Skeptizismus: Neue Literatur zu David Hume- (I) ', Philosophische Rundschau 26, 161-86. GOOSENS, W. K. 'Stove and Inductive Scepticism', Australas... (shrink)

Bien plus qu’une position relativiste ou nihiliste, on reproche parfois aujourd’hui à Lyotard d’avoir fait le lit de la « post-vérité » par la promotion de la multiplicité de jeux de langage sans au-delà et sans principes généraux de validation. Par un raccourci stupéfiant, on y lit l’affirmation que les discours sont tous également légitimes et ne doivent posséder comme autre principe de validation que le fait d’avoir été proférés. Si l’accusation d’un Lyotard inspirateur d’une forme de « post-vérité » (...) nous semble infondée, c’est que la pensée et la parole s’attachent toujours pour lui à « quelque chose » dont il faut avoir le souci ou qu’il faut chercher à entendre. Lyotard nous semble moins soucieux de relativiser ou, comme on l’en accuse aujourd’hui, d’abandonner l’exigence de vérité que de montrer, d’une part, que celle-ci peut se dire en plusieurs sens, et, d’autre part, qu’on ne vient pas à bout de cette dernière aux moyens de ce qu’il nomme « le discours ». Que ce soit par la pensée, la parole, la création ou l’action, on s’attache toujours à « quelque chose » dont on a souci, et la promotion de la multiplicité dans le champ de la vérité vise non à s’affranchir du vrai mais à se montrer à sa hauteur par un élargissement des perspectives qui ne le cantonne pas à un seul genre de lieu. (shrink)

COVV: I say to myself that the earth is extinguished, though I never saw it lit. (Pause.) It’s easy going. (Pause.) When I fall I’ll weep for happiness. (Pause. He goes towards door.)HAMM: Clov! (C...

L'épistémologie de Kant, dont le but principal est d'expliquer la possibilité des jugements synthétiques a priori, est une épistémologie du point de vue du sujet ou «à la première personne»: le «sujet connaissant», dit Kant, «…compare, lie ou sépare [les] représentations et travaille … la matière brute des impressions sensibles pour en tirer une connaissance des objets…». C'est l'esprit, ou le moi pensant, comme il le soutient aussi, qui construit à partir des impressions reçues des sens une représentation objective de (...) l'univers en soumettant les phénomènes à ses formes a priori et à ses catégories. Mais de quelle nature peut être ce «moi» qui connaît? Est-il possible d'en dire quelque chose? Pour lui, «nous n'avons ni ne pouvons [en] avoir la moindre connaissance…». Le «je» du «Je pense», comme on le lit dans la déduction transcendantale des catégories, doit pouvoir «accompagner toutes mes représentations…», mais il ne peut être pour lui-même un objet de connaissance ou de représentation parce que «je ne saurais connaître comme objet cela même [le sujet] qu'il me faut supposer pour connaître en général un objet…». (shrink)

" Les réflexions de Frédéric Schiffter, qu'on les tienne pour philosophiques ou anti-philosophiques, sont inséparables d'une humeur portée sur le scepticisme et le pessimisme, un peu à la manière de Cioran. Frédéric Schiffter fait de l'ennui une composante essentielle de la vie humaine (tel Schopenhauer) ; mais en même temps il défend sans cesse la réalité contre les utopies qui en interdisent une vision lucide et qu'il range dans deux catégories philosophiques qui lui sont personnelles : l'ordre du blobla et (...) l'ordre du chichi. L'homme du blabla vante l'irréel : c'est un charlatan. L'homme du chichi décrie le réel : c'est un précieux dégoûté. Mélangeant comme Montaigne anecdotes et considérations philosophiques, écrit dans une langue simple et élégante, ce livre se lit d'une traite et très agréablement. " Clément Rosset. (shrink)

Translation from German of a lit review (summarizing and evaluating) in the psychology of thinking. Focuses on experimental psychology and addresses problems of self-observation (Lipps, Ach, Judd, Gibson, Wm. James, Kiesow), reproduction (Semon, Forel, Detto), the influence of an assigned task and capacities for concentration (Ach, Bleuler, Heilbronner), perseveration (Heilbronner, Stransky, Kiesow), a few miscellaneous issues Watt couldn't fit into these categories (Aliotta, Lobsien, Ranschburg, C. Jung), diagnosing a state of affairs (Wertheimer and Klein, C. Jung), and psychopathology (Heilbronner, Stransky, (...) Reich). (shrink)

Ce livre offre un parcours en compagnie d'ecrivains, philosophes et poetes, parmi les plus marquants de la deuxieme moitie du XXe siecle. Son point de depart est une question qui porte sur l'essence meme de la litterature: que signifie aimer avec passion une oeuvre et l'homme qui est derriere?... Comment vit-on avec? Et qu'y trouve-t-on pour vivre avec soi meme, apprendre a vivre ainsi? Il s'agit donc d'un livre ecrit a la premiere personne par un auteur qui aura eu la (...) chance de croiser le chemin de quelques grandes figures de la pensee francaise contemporaine: Edmond Jabes, Jacques Derrida et Andre du Bouchet, Maurice Blanchot de facon plus lointaine. On y trouvera pourtant une volonte clairement pedagogique. Didier Cahen reprend et etudie les enonces multiples de ces createurs de la postmodernite sur l'articulation de la pensee et de la litterature ou sur l'espace commun de la philosophie et de la poesie. Dans la foulee, il aborde des questions plus ouvertes, qui touchent a l'intuition de l'autre, au non-savoir qu'explore la face cachee de la litterature. Comme le demontrent les oeuvres singulieres de Roger Laporte et de Marcel Cohen, ecrire c'est mettre sa vie en jeu, se fier a ce qui vient, suivre l'ordre de l'Autre... en se jouant de l'etre. Indiscipline au coeur des disciplines, cet exercice de la litterature traverse ainsi les genres, engage son ecriture au-dela des lignes du livre, delivre le message qui se lit a livre ouvert. (shrink)

Qu’en est-il de la relation de Heidegger à la pensée grecque? Que cherchait donc Heidegger chez les Grecs? Avant tout une confirmation de sa propre pensée : c’est sa conception de la vérité, de l’être, du sacré, du poème que les Grecs auraient appréhendée sous une forme déjà presque authentique. « Les Grecs » ou plutôt certains d’entre eux – puisqu’il ne s’est jamais intéressé à des présocratiques comme Démocrite et Empédocle, aux cyniques, aux stoïciens, au néo-platonisme… Il lit « (...) les Gre... (shrink)

"On se prend à rêver la situation de Nietzsche faisant retour sur sa vie pour écrire lui-même l'origine de sa pensée dans un livre qui montre qu'il se crée lui-même en tant que dieu-philosophe de l'écriture dionysiaque." (Sarah Kofman) Jugnon le sait de longue date qui s'en est fait tôt une méthode, ou un moyen, ou une liberté supplémentaires, dont chacun des livres tient à la fois de l'installation, du montage, du collage. Il en a l'art. l'Ivre Nietzsche n'y déroge (...) pas. Installation, montage, collage, pas pour que joue ensemble ce qui n'aurait rien à voir, mais pour que fasse "ensemble" ce qu'on n'a jamais fait jouer. Nul mieux que lui ne lit sans doute ; nul mieux que lui ne lie, surtout, lisant, écrivant, qui lit pour lier, c'est-à-dire qui lit doublement, amenant au jour, montrant des formes (d'écriture, de pensée) inaperçues jusqu'alors, qu'il mélange dans un shaker, qu'il agite ensuite. Agitation iconoclaste : le cocktail est raide, fait pour l'ivresse, fait pour danser & penser, comme on danse & pense (denser/panser) sous un volcan, comme danse & pense l'ivre vice-consul d'Au-dessous du volcan — lui aussi pris dans l'effroi de son éternel retour propre. Michel Surya. (shrink)