L'oeuvre de Gaston Bachelard apparaît aujourd'hui comme une oeuvre prophétique. Dans la mesure où elle concerne aussi bien les domaines de l'imagination et de la poésie que les démarches rationnelles de la recherche scientifique la plus avancée. Et l'homme contemporain est effectivement en proie aux exigences contradictoires de l'intelligence spéculative et des dérives créatrices de l'imaginaire. (4e de couverture).

Nourri des travaux de Bachelard, Lévi-Strauss, Dumézil, Eliade, salué à sa sortie par le grand historien des Annales Lucien Febvre, Mythe et métaphysique explore un continent resté longtemps inexploré de la pensée philosophique : celui de la place du mythe dans la métaphysique. Loin d'être un savoir inférieur, le mythe possède une rationalité qui en fait un maillon essentiel dans l'histoire humaine. L'erreur de la philosophie classique était de faire de la conscience une entité isolée du monde. Or le (...) domaine mythique embrasse dans une même perception l'ordre des choses et l'activité humaine. Un grand texte philosophique en forme de plaidoyer pour faire du mythe une sagesse à la mesure de l'homme. (shrink)

pt. 1. Gaston Bachelard's historical epistemology.--pt. 2. For a critique of epistemology.

Gaston Bachelard (1884-1962) was a seminal figure in contemporary French philosophy. Together with Michel Foucault, Georges Canguilhem and Jean Cavailles, he shaped the 'French epistemological' school of philosophy of science. In France, Bachelard is a towering presence; in the English-speaking world, he is little known. Now, Zbigniew Kotowicz gives us the first English language, in-depth presentation of the entire spectrum of Bachelard's work: epistemology, poetic imagination and temporality. And he explores an old philosophical tradition that (...) class='Hi'>Bachelard's thought opens up - atomism - a doctrine that has been almost forgotten and is much misunderstood ". (shrink)

: The paper aims at an analysis of the oeuvre of the French historian of science and epistemologist Gaston Bachelard (1884–1962). Bachelard was the founder of a tradition of French thinking about science that extended from Jean Cavaillès over Georges Canguilhem to Michel Foucault. In the past, he has become best known and criticized for his postulation of an epistemological rupture between everyday experience and scientific experience. In my analysis, I emphasize another aspect of the work of (...) Bachelard. It is the way he conceptualizes the relation between scientific thinking and technology in modern science. Within this framework, the notion of "phenomenotechnique" is of crucial importance. It is one of the organizing concepts of Bachelard's historical epistemology, and it serves as the organizing center of this paper. (shrink)

Georges Canguilhem não inicia suas publicações no campo da história das ciências da vida. Nas primeiras décadas em que seu pensamento se formulou (1920-1930), sua obra versava sobre temas relacionados à filosofia dos valores e à moral. Contudo, em decorrência de acontecimentos internos e externos a seu pensamento, a partir de meados da década de 1950 Canguilhem se consagra como um dos maiores expoentes da assim chamada epistemologia histórica francesa, com uma série de publicações sobre o domínio histórico das (...) ciências da vida. Nestes estudos, e de um modo cada vez mais evidente em sua obra, nota-se uma influência decisiva de Gaston Bachelard, a quem pouco se reportava nas décadas anteriores. É também nesse período que se consolida o que se pode conceber como sendo a sua “filosofia biológica”. Este estudo propõe tirar algumas consequências desse acontecimento na esfera da filosofia de Georges Canguilhem. (shrink)

Qu'un interet renouvele se manifeste aujourd'hui pour la versant epistemologique de l'oeuvre de Gaston Bachelard peut se comprendre au regard de l'histoire contemporaine de la philosophie des sciences. Cette histoire a ete dominee durant la plus grande partie du XXe siecle par une doctrine - celle de l'empirisme (ou positivisme) logique - promue a Vienne a la fin des annees 1920 par une institution originale, le Cercle de Vienne qui publie son manifeste en 1929, et s'organise comme un mouvement (...) a visee universelle et progressiste - celui de la conception scientifique du monde. La tradition francaise de la philosophie des sciences a pris d'entree de jeu un tout autre chemin. Si elle ne les a pas ignorees, elle a refuse de souscrire aux theses majeures du positivisme logique lorsqu'il s'est presente a elle. Elle a toujours lie etroitement philosophie et histoire des sciences. Dans le titre de ce petit livre ecrit durant l'annee universitaire 1967-1968 sous la direction de Georges Canquilhem, Dominique Lecourt a avance l'expression d'epistemologie historique pour signaler, a propos de Gaston Bachelard, cette particularite. (shrink)

Resumo: Assim como o neokantismo, a fenomenologia e a filosofia analítica, também a epistemologia histórica francesa teve sua emergência no contexto da crise das ciências, na virada para o século XX. Por seus desdobramentos particulares, as obras de Gaston Bachelard e de Georges Canguilhem romperam, cada uma a seu modo, respectivamente com o neokantismo representado por Brunschvicg e por Alain. Neste artigo, propõe-se retirar algumas consequências epistemológicas, éticas e políticas dessas duas rupturas, analisando brevemente as particularidades de cada (...) um dos dois casos.: As well as neo-Kantianism, phenomenology and analytical philosophy, French historical epistemology also had its emergence in the context of the crisis of the sciences at the turn of the 20th century. Due to their own developments, the works of Gaston Bachelard and Georges Canguilhem broke, each in its path, respectively with the neo-Kantianism represented by Brunschvicg and by Alain. In this article, we propose to draw some epistemological, ethical, and political consequences of these two ruptures, briefly analyzing the particularities of each of the two cases. (shrink)

In the late 1960s, Georges Canguilhem introduced the concept of ‘scientific ideology’. This concept had not played any role in his previous work, so why introduce it at all? This is the central question of my paper. Although it may seem a rather modest question, its answer in fact uncovers hidden tensions in the tradition of historical epistemology, in particular between its normative and descriptive aspects. The term ideology suggests the influence of Althusser’s and Foucault’s philosophies. However, I show (...) the differences between Canguilhem’s concept of scientific ideology and Althusser’s and Foucault’s respective concepts of ideology. I argue that Canguilhem was in fact attempting to solve long-standing problems in the tradition of historical epistemology, rather than following the lead of his younger colleagues. I argue that Canguilhem’s ‘refurbishment without rejection’ of Bachelard’s epistemology, which the concept of scientific ideology was aimed to implement, was necessary to justify the historical narratives that Canguilhem had constructed in his own work as a historian of concepts. A strict acceptance of Bachelard’s epistemology would have made it impossible to justify them. Canguilhem’s concept of scientific ideology therefore served as a theoretical justification of his practice as a historian. I maintain that the concept of scientific ideology was needed to reconcile Bachelard’s normative epistemology with Canguilhem’s view of the history of science and its aims, which differed from Bachelard’s more than it is generally acknowledged. (shrink)

The work of Georges Matisse (1874–1961), a French physicist, philosopher, epistemologist, and translator, has been largely overlooked, particularly his contributions to the history of science in the first half of the 20th century. His work focused on the emerging field of cybernetics and provided a philosophical perspective on new physics. His books delved into the philosophical underpinnings of scientific doctrines, viewing them as systems of reference and modes of representation rather than expressions of absolute truths. Although he could not (...) personally attend the Copenhagen Congress for the Unity of Science in 1936, his talk was presented, offering a unique case study on uncertainty and determinism. Matisse employed an expanded notion of causality to study concrete facts in human societies, arguing against a universal law of history. His final book was dedicated to Bachelard. This paper offers initial insights into Matisse’s sociology program, discusses his methodological approaches within logical empiricism, and outlines his perspective on the purpose of nature. The study concludes that Matisse’s interdisciplinary approach, which included a theory on the relationship between religion and science, was based on his robust understanding of biophysics and scientific history. (shrink)

In October 1984, Bruno Huisman stated with regards to Jean Cavaillès, ‘Let us be honest, or at least realistic: today, one can be a professor of philosophy without ever having read a single line of Cavaillès. Often invoked, sometimes quoted, the oeuvre of Cavaillès is little attended for itself’ (Huisman 1984). As for Albert Lautman, it would seem that the situation is even more extreme. In 1994, the publisher Hermann, under the impetus of Bruno Huisman and George Canguilhem, collected almost (...) the totality of the Jean Cavaillès papers in one volume (Oeuvres complètes de philosophie des sciences (Cavaillès 1994)). But, the Essai sur l’unité des mathématiques et divers écrits (Lautman 1977), published by the Union générale d’Éditions in 1977, had all but disappeared by the early 1980s and yet was never republished! This will remain one of the great indignities of French publishing, for as Jean Petitot rightly affirms: ‘Regarded as too speculative, in spite of his exceptional mathematical scholarship and his close connection with Hilbertian axiomatic structuralism, his mathematical philosophy has, until now, been devoid of any particular attention …. We would like to state clearly from the start, Albert Lautman represents, in our view, without exaggeration, one of the most inspired philosophers of this century’ (Petitot 1987, 79-80). (shrink)

In this article I assess Georges Canguilhem's historical epistemology with both theoretical and historical questions in mind. From a theoretical point of view, I am concerned with the relation between history and philosophy, and in particular with the philosophical assumptions and external norms that are involved in history writing. Moreover, I am concerned with the role that history can play in the understanding and evaluation of philosophical concepts. From a historical point of view, I regard historical epistemology, as developed (...) by Gaston Bachelard and Georges Canguilhem, as a conception and practice which came out of the project, elaborated in France from the 1920s to the 1940s, of combining history of science and philosophy. I analyse in particular Canguilhem's epistemology in his theory and practice of history of science. What he called 'normative history' is the focus of my analysis. I evaluate the question of the nature and provenience of the norm employed in normative history, and I compare it with the norm as discussed by Canguilhem in Le normal et le pathologique. While I am critical of Canguilhem's treatment of history, I conclude that his philosophical suggestion to analyse the formation of scientific concepts 'from below' represents a useful model for history and philosophy of science, and that it can be very profitably extended to philosophical concepts. (shrink)

Although in the last decades increasingly more philosophers have paid attention to the life sciences, traditionally physics has dominated general philosophy of science. Does a focus on the life sciences and medicine produce a different philosophy of science and indeed a different conception of knowledge? Here Cristina Chimisso does not attempt to give a comprehensive answer to this question; rather, she presents a case study focussed on Georges Canguilhem. Canguilhem continued the philosophical tradition that we now call historical epistemology, (...) and always referred very closely to the philosophy of Gaston Bachelard. However, whereas Bachelard primarily studied the history of chemistry and physics, Canguilhem turned to the life sciences, medicine and psychiatry. Chimisso investigates their respective conceptions and uses of norms. Chimisso argues that some crucial differences in how they regarded norms, seldom emphasised by Canguilhem himself and indeed by critics, stem from the sciences on which they concentrated. (shrink)

The paper approaches the topic of what a general philosophy of science could mean today from the perspective of a historical epistemology. Consequently, in a first step, the paper looks at the notion of generality in the sciences, and how it evolved over time, on the example of the life sciences. In the second part of the paper, the urgency of a general philosophy of science is located in the history of philosophy of science. Two attempts at the beginning of (...) the twentieth century are particularly highlighted: that of Karl Popper and that of Martin Heidegger. Both of them concentrate, albeit in widely different form, on the phenomenon of research as an open-ended process. This trend is even more pronounced in Gaston Bachelard’s version of a historical epistemology, whose work is taken as a point of reference for a general historical epistemology of research. The paper concludes with a plea to look, with Georges Canguilhem, at the history of the sciences as a laboratory for epistemology. (shrink)

Massimiliano Simons provides the first systematic study of Serres' work in the context of late 20th-century French philosophy of science. By proposing new readings of Serres' philosophy, Simons creates a synthesis between his predecessors, Gaston Bachelard, Georges Canguilhem, and Louis Althusser as well as contemporary Francophone philosophers of science such as Bruno Latour and Isabelle Stengers. Simons situates Serres' unique contribution through his notion of the quasi-object, a concept, he argues, organizes great parts of Serres' work into a (...) promising philosophy of science as well as a challenge to the narrower field of French epistemology, to which it has often been limited. Simons highlights how the concept encompasses Serres' commitment to positive relations between science and culture and his rejection of pleas to purify the scientific self from imaginative and cultural elements. It helps to situate Serres between the distinct traditions of Bachelard and Latour as well as progressing the innovative aspects of Serres' philosophy for current debates in the philosophy, history, and sociology of science. Showing how Serres' philosophy can serve as a normative approach to science and technology, Michel Serres and French Philosophy of Science takes in themes of materiality, religiosity, modernity and ecology to advance a timely alternative to philosophy of science for contemporary life. (shrink)

This paper represents a philosophical reflection on the nature and value of philosophy itself. Georges Canguilhem somewhat scandalously argued that the fundamental value of philosophy does not lie in truth. He suggests that truth is a typical value of science because truth is what science says and what is said scientifically. Why would a philosopher depreciate his own discipline? And does he really do so? Or is there a different motivation: to help philosophy to become a much more self‐confident (...) voice? And if truth is no longer a value of philosophy, what value fits it better? The article follows Canguilhem in his conception of truth, science, and philosophy. It is against the background of these considerations that the specific revised anthropology of the scientist or philosopher is formed. The main question is what this means for current philosophy and why it could be inspiring for philosophers today. (shrink)

This paper critically evaluates Foucault’s relation to Bachelard and Canguilhem. It reconsiders the relevance of the concept of “influence” for treating this relation in order to register the more sceptical position Foucault adopts towards knowledge practices than either of these figures from twentieth-century French epistemology.

This paper offers a new concept of the firm that aims at balancing the corporate economic, social, and environmental responsibilities and goes beyond the stakeholder approach. It intends to provide a conceptual and operationalizable basis to fairly assess corporate conduct from both inside and outside the companies. To a large extent these different responsibilities may overlap and reinforce each other. However, if they conflict, they should be clearly evaluated for their own sake and in terms of wealth creation. Only then (...) can a balanced approach be realized. Section 1 briefly discusses some general aspects of the relationship between concepts and measurement. In Section 2, a concept of the firm is developed that is based on the notion of responsibility and balances economic, social and environmental responsibilities. According to these concepts, different ways of measuring corporate planning and performance are examined in Section 3, followed up by a summary and conclusions. (shrink)

From the Series Editor's Introduction: For much of the twentieth century, French intellectual life was dominated by theoreticians and historians of mentalite. Traditionally, the study of the mind and of its limits and capabilities was the domain of philosophy, however in the first decades of the twentieth century practitioners of the emergent human and social sciences were increasingly competing with philosophers in this field: ethnologists, sociologists, psychologists and historians of science were all claiming to study 'how people think'. Scholars, including (...) Gaston Bachelard, Georges Canguilhem, Leon Brunschvicg, Lucien Levy-Bruhl, Lucien Febvre, Abel Rey, Alexandre Koyre and Helene Metzger were all investigating the mind historically and participating in shared research projects. Yet, as they have since been appropriated by the different disciplines, literature on their findings has so far failed to recognise the connections between their research and their importance in intellectual history.In this exemplary book, Cristina Chimisso reconstructs the world of these intellectuals and the key debates in the philosophy of mind, particularly between those who studied specific mentalities by employing prevalently historical and philological methods, and those who thought it possible to write a history of the mind, outlining the evolution of ways of thinking that had produced the modern mentality. Dr Chimisso situates the key French scholars in their historical context and shows how their ideas and agendas were indissolubly linked with their social and institutional positions, such as their political and religious allegiances, their status in academia, and their familial situation.The author employs a vast range of original research, using philosophical and scientific texts as well as archive documents, correspondence and seminar minutes from the period covered, to recreate the milieu in which these relatively neglected scholars made advances in the history of philosophy and science, and produced ideas that would greatly influence later intellectuals such as Foucault, Derrida and Bourdieu. This book will appeal to historians of science and philosophy, particularly Continental philosophy, and those with interest in the history of ideas and the historiography of the disciplines of the social sciences. (shrink)

L’évolution du vivant, ontogénétique comme phylogénétique, repose sur de nombreux mouvements par oppositions et dépassements successifs. Ces mouvements peuvent être observés aussi bien dans la vie organique que dans la vie mentale et rapprochés de thèses philosophiques comme la dialectique dagognétienne, mais aussi de l’intégration spencérienne. Au niveau organique s’exerce une opposition entre les principes darwiniens de la sélection naturelle et des principes d’association (que j’ai appelés « complexité en mosaïque ») qui agissent en sens opposé. Au niveau mental, cette (...) opposition aboutit à des contradictions entre la prédation et l’entraide entre les individus. (shrink)

Critique littéraire parue dans ¤¤Le Mercure de France¤¤ en 1912, alors de G. Palante se considère encore comme le disciple de J. de Gaultier, qui décrit le phénomène de l'évocation psychologique et de la tentation.

1. La philosophie et les mythes.--2. Les fondements de la psychologie.

The organizational justice literature and the family business literature have developed independently, which limits our understanding of fairness and justice in the family business workplace. So far, the concepts of justice and fairness have been used interchangeably in the family business literature, as if objective measures that aim to increase justice in the workplace will automatically translate into fairness perceptions among family business employees. By integrating the organizational justice literature and the family business literature, we first differentiate between the two (...) concepts of justice and fairness and argue that a utilitarian conceptualization of justice may come into direct conflict with fairness perceptions in the family business workplace. Second, we shed light on the importance of incorporating socioemotional goals, particularly those that reveal a bright side of socioemotional wealth, into rules and regulations designed to increase justice in the workplace, which, we argue, contributes to increasing fairness perceptions among employees and to building and maintaining an ethical family business workplace. Theoretical and practical contributions are discussed at the end of the paper. (shrink)

The essay aims to show how business ethics—understood as a three-level approach—can strengthen the social cohesion of a society, which is jeopardized today in many ways. In the first part, the purpose of business and the economy is explained as the creation of wealth defined as a combination of private and public wealth that includes natural, economic, human, and social capital. Special emphasis is placed on the implications of the creation of public wealth which requires institutions other than the market (...) and motivations other than self-regarding ones. In the second part, the question of what holds a society together is discussed through different approaches: enlightened self-interest, a new game-theoretical approach, and the concept of the common good advanced by Catholic Social Teaching, followed by my own proposal. The third part presents several perspectives for business ethics to strengthen social cohesion of a society by focusing on the purpose of business and the economy to create natural, economic, human, and social capital; by advancing public goods that stand the test of ethical scrutiny; and by securing human rights conceptualized as public goods. (shrink)

Commentary on Galen Strawson's 'Realistic Monism: Why Physicalism Entails Panpsychism'.