RésuméLa logique formelle classique est la science des règles de la perfection de la pensée quant à la cohérence. Elle concerne la pensée achevée ou considérée comme telle; tandis que la concordance de la pensée et du réel n'entre pas en considération dans cette discipline. Cette concordance implique un mouvement de la pensée vers son objet, de sorte que l'identité d'une idée comprend à cet égard une direction vers l'objet. La concordance concerne la pensée mouvante s'appliquant à«l'actuel» et au «personnel». (...) Le progrès de la pensée ne peut se faire qu'en considérant les régles de cohérence comme un idéal qui ne se réalise jamais absolument dans la pensée actuelle. Enfin, cet idéal peut lui‐même sc préciser en face d'une pensée nouvelle. Mais alors, il ne faut pas faire des principes logiques des normes transcendantales. (shrink)

The confrontation of philosophy with other forms of knowledge is not something new. Since its establishment as a specific discourse in Plato, the so-called "philosophy" tries to define itself in confrontation with other discourses in practice in the city. We can say that the history of philosophy is not exhausted in the history of its doctrines and systems, that is, it cannot be minimally understood without taking into account the clash of philosophy with other forms of knowledge, since both philosophy (...) and other forms of knowledge react to the broader historical constellation in which they are inscribed and, at the same time, partly provoked. In this article, we shall examine two contemporary examples of the confrontation between philosophy and the human sciences: the thoughts of Paul Ricœur and Theodor Adorno, and, more precisely, the transformations that their thoughts have undergone through confrontation with Freud's thought. Both authors faced, each one in his own way, a demand that remains the one of our time: philosophy can and must fight against evil; it can neither ignore it, nor pretend to dissolve it in a specious argumentation. (shrink)

Les Images parlantes : l'étrangeté habite ce titre! Les détournements de l'image vers quelque langage codé, les contrebandes de l'image au gré de textes particulièrement transgresseurs, les transports sur la langue sont multiples. Une évidence s'impose donc : l'image ne parle pas, mais elle doit être parlée. Dès lors s'ouvre le domaine des fables et des fictions émanant de l'image elle-même, aptes toutefois à la spécifier comme à la sonder. Exhiber une fonction inédite et captatrice de l'image en tant qu'elle (...) est parlée, c'est se prononcer pour son capital créateur, son ingénieuse inventivité. Bref, le registre de l'iconique pourrait, au terme de ce livre, se laisser argumenter en ces mots : " Voir, c'est faire parler "! (shrink)

RésuméDans l'article qui précède, l'auteur s'efforce, à l'intention surtout de ceux qui enseignent les Eléments, de mettre en lumière la signification et l'importance de deux ouvrages concernant la géométrie. Le court écrit de M. G. Bouligand fait apparaǐtre la structure algébrique et logique de cette science et présente une ȧxiomatique introduisant les notions d'ensemble et de groupe de transformation. Ainsi s'élabore une classification progressive des problèmes selon le genre des solutions qui leur conviennent. Le livre beaucoup plus étendu de M. (...) F. Gonseth analyse les aspects intuitif, expérimental et théorique de ce qui constituait l'élémentaire dans les traités classiques, puis expose les recherches suscitées par le postulat d'Euclide qui ont amené au développement de la méthode axiomatique. Le triomphe de l'atomisme, découvrant un monde où les notions élémentaires de la géométrie ne s'applíquent plus intégralement, vient rendre plus aigu encore le problème du fondement de la vérité géométrique et celui de la nature de l'espace. Grǎce à l'introduction de notions telles que celle de correspondance schématique et celle de modèle, la géométrie apparaǐt comme une science rationnelle en évolution et à laquelle l'axiomatique sert de critère. Mais bien loin de présenter les caractères d'une pure rationalité, cette axiomatique retient certaines données intuitives, měme dans son application aux géométries non euclidiennes; elle organise un contrǒle de nos intuitions les plus élémentaires les unes par les autres, et assure par leur intermédiaire la portée expérimentale et la cohérence de la géométrie. On assiste ainsi à une véritable mutation de l'élémentaire; mais celle‐ci n'est pas due au hasard. La méthode qui a présidé à cette transformation, dont les étapes historiques sont décrites, est clairement dégagée et il est visible qu'elle régit également les formes nouvelles de la physique dont la constitution théorique ne diffère pas essentiellement de la géométrie considérée comme la science rationnelle de l'espace. Cette méthode est le statut d'une science ouverte. Ainsi se trouve pleinement légitimé un exposé comme celui de M. Bouligand. En s'illustrant l'un l'autre, les deux ouvrages offrent des horizons nouveaux à l'enseignement, měme élémentaire, de la géométrie. La portée philosophique de ces ouvrages n'est pas moindre que leur portée pédagogique.ZusammenfassungIn der voranstehenden Besprechung möchte der Rezensent insbesondere diejenigen unter den Lesern, die die Elemente unterrichten, auf zwei bedeutende Geometriewerke hinweisen. G. Bouligands knapp gehaltene Schrift stellt den algebraisch‐logischen Aufbau dieser Wissenschaft ins Licht und bietet eine Axiomatik, die die Begriffe der Menge und der Transformations‐gruppe einführt. Ausgehend von der passenden Lösungsart gelangt der Verfasser zu einer fortschreitenden Klassifizierung der Aufgaben. In seinem viel breiter angelegten Werk untersucht F. Gonseth das in den klassischen Lehrbüchern als das Elementare angesehene vom intuitiven, experimentellen und theoretischen Gesichtspunkte aus und macht daran anschliessend mit den von Euklids Postulat ausgehenden Nachforschungen, die zur Entwicklung der axiomatischen Methode geführt haben, bekannt. Der eigentliche Siegeszug des Atomismus und die mit dieser Wissenschaft verbundene Entdeckung einer Welt, in der die grundsätzlichen Begriffe der Geometrie ihre volle Bestätigung nicht mehr erfahren, macht die Frage nach den Grundlagen der Geometrie und die nach dem Wesen des Raums besonders brennend. Die Einführung von Begriffen wie Schema und Modell lässt die Geometrie als eine in Entwicklung begriffene Rationalwissenschaft erscheinen, welcher die Axiomatik als Prüfstein dient. Letztere trägt aber durchaus nicht die Züge reiner Vernunftmässigkeit, sie hält vielmehr, selbst in ihrer Anwendung auf die nichteuklidischen Geometrien, an gewissen intuitiven Voraussetzungen fest; sie ermöglicht eine wechselseitige Kritik unserer elementarsten intuitiven Erkenntnisse unter sich und gewährleistet so die experimentelle Tragweite und die Kohärenz der Geometrie. Es findet also eine eigentliche Mutation des Elementaren statt, doch bleibt dieser Wandel nicht dem Zufall überlassen. Die Planmässigkeit, mit der er sich vollzog, wird unter Beschreibung der geschichtlichen Entwicklungsstufen klar dargelegt, womit erkennbar wird, dass er auch die neueren Formen der Physik bestimmt, die sich ja nach ihrem theoretischen Grundgesetz von der Geometrie als der rationalen Wissenschaft vom Raume nicht wesentlich unterscheidet. Eine solche Methode erfüllt das Lebensgesetz einer offenen Wissenschaft. Durch sie finden Ausführungen wie die Bouligands ihre volle Rechtfertigung. Sich gegenseitig ergänzend und erläuternd eröffnen beide Werke selbst dem Elementarunterricht in der Geometrie neue Möglichkeiten. Der pädagogischen kommt ihre philosophische Bedeutung gleich.In the foregoing article the author endeavours—especially for all who are teaching the Elements—to set forth the significance and importance of two books about geometry. Mr. G. Bouligand's short writing brings out the algebraic and logical structure of that science and presents an »axiomatic« introducing both the notions of »whole« and »group of transformation«. A progressive classification of problems is thus elaborated according to the kinds of solutions that suit them. Mr. F. Gonseth, in his far more comprehensive work, analyses the intuitive, experimental and theoretical aspects of what used to constitute the elementary in classical treatises, then states the researches raised up by Euclid's postulate and leading to the development of the axiomatic method. The triumph of atomism, discovering a world to which the elementary notions of geometry do no longer apply fully, makes it still more difficult to solve the problems of the basing of both geometrical truth and the nature of space. Thanks to his introducing such ideas as »schematic correspondence« and »model«, geometry appears as a rational science in progress using the »axiomatic« as its criterion. But far from offering the characteristics of pure rationality, such an »axiomatic« retains some intuitive bases, even when applied to non‐Euclidian geometries; it organizes a control of our most elementary intuitions by setting them against one another, and secures through their medium the experimental significance and coherence of geometry. Thus a real mutation of the elementary takes place; but it is not owing to mere chance. The method which has presided over that transformation, the historical changes and stages of which are described, is clearly shown, and it is made evident that it also determines the new forms of physics, the theoretical constitution of which does not differ essentially from geometry considered as the rational science of space. That method is the statute of an open science. So Mr. Bouligand's account is fully justified. By elucidating each other, both books open new horizons to the teaching—even elementary—of geometry. The philosophical significance of those books is of no less importance than the pedagogical one. (shrink)

In this paper, I show that Aristophanes’s speech in Plato’s Symposium is tied into an interesting and hitherto unexplored web of ideas in Plato’s ethics and psychology. The poet’s analysis of erōs as ‘leading us to what “belongs” (the oikeion)’ (193d2) and as ‘restoring us in our “original nature” (archaia phusis)’ (193d4) is not a mere negative contribution that renders him a ‘target for Diotima’s fire’ (Dover). Rather, he unwittingly communicates central ethical and psychological ideas which we find developed in (...) key passages of Plato’s dialogues. What is interesting is that Diotima in a curious passage seems to dismiss his contribution of the oikeion as unrelated to our good (agathon) and irrelevant to the analysis of desire (205d10–206a1). I argue that this interpretation of Diotima’s response to Aristophanes, which would render her position an ethical anomaly in Plato’s dialogues, should be rejected. Instead, it is more plausible to read her response as proposing a revisionary conception of the oikeion, relying on the idea that our agathon is our true oikeion. In addition, I tentatively suggest that the theory of psychic pregnancy may be seen as presenting the agathon of wisdom of virtue produced in the ascent as an oikeion. Just as fascinating as Diotima’s stance on the oikeion is the question how her teachings relate to the concept of an archaia phusis of the soul. The idea that the soul’s self-perfection constitutes a return to a temporally prior condition of excellence, which in two places other than the Symposium (Republic X, Timaeus) is called the ‘archaia phusis’, is pervasive and centrally important to Plato’s psychology. I address the question whether Diotima’s ascent passage constitutes a psychological anomaly in portraying self-perfection as unrelated to the concept of the archaia phusis. I argue that an answer to this depends on the stance we take on the Symposium’s position regarding the immortality of the soul. While a reading that posits a rejection of immortality in the Symposium must indeed deny a role for the concept in Diotima’s speech, I show that a reading allowing for immortality as a theoretical commitment in the background has an interesting interpretative option: along with Timaeus 90d5, it may fruitfully interpret the ascent as an ordering of the soul ‘in accordance with its archaia phusis’. (shrink)

Many have argued against the claim that Plato posited the mathematical objects that are the subjects of Metaphysics M and N. This paper shifts the burden of proof onto these objectors to show that Plato did not posit these entities. It does so by making two claims: first, that Plato should posit the mathematical Intermediates because Forms and physical objects are ill suited in comparison to Intermediates to serve as the objects of mathematics; second, that their utility, combined with Aristotle’s (...) commentary on Plato’s posit of Intermediates, provides good reason to conclude that Plato did posit them. (shrink)

H. S. Eveling; XI.—Composition and Criticism, Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, Volume 59, Issue 1, 1 June 1959, Pages 213–232, https://doi.org/10.1093/a.

H. S. Eveling; XII—Some Patterns of Justification in Ethics, Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, Volume 66, Issue 1, 1 June 1966, Pages 149–166, https://do.

As the title indicates, Faith and Knowledge deals with the relation between religious faith and cognitive beliefs, between the truth of religion and the truths of philosophy and science. Hegel is guided by his understanding of the historical situation: the individual alienated from God, nature, and community; and he is influenced by the new philosophy of Schelling, the Spinozistic Philosophy of Identity with its superb vision of the inner unity of God, nature, and rational man. Through a brilliant discussion of (...) the philosophies of Kant, Fichte, and other luminaries of the period, Hegel shows that the time has finally come to give philosophy the authentic shape it has always been trying to reach, a shape in which philosophy’s old conflicts with religion on the one hand and with the sciences on the other are suspended once for all. This is the first English translation of this important essay. Professor H. S. Harris offers a historical and analytic commentary to the text and Professor Cerf offers an introduction to the general reader which focuses on the concept of intellectual intuition and on the difference between authentic and inauthentic philosophy. (shrink)

Resumo: Paul Ricoeur propõe uma filosofia do símbolo, que se encontra no limiar da inserção da hermenêutica em sua filosofia. Decisiva para esta fase, foi a interpelação de outras disciplinas que se constituíram por meio da análise da linguagem simbólica, entre as quais se encontra a antropologia estrutural de Lévi-Strauss. Dessa forma, definimos os termos mais específicos do diálogo estabelecido entre Paul Ricoeur e Claude Lévi-Strauss sobre a análise da linguagem simbólica do mito. Esta pesquisa nos auxiliou a compreender melhor (...) a fase de abertura da hermenêutica ricoeuriana e suas aproximações e afastamentos com o estruturalismo lévi-straussiano, tão difundido em nosso campo acadêmico. Palavras-chave: Hermenêutica; Estruturalismo; Símbolo. Convergent divergence: the dialogue between Paul Ricoeur and Claude Lévi-Strauss Abstract: Paul Ricoeur proposes a philosophy of the symbol, which is on the threshold of the insertion of hermeneutics in his philosophy. Decisive for this phase, was to put forward the question to other disciplines that played an essential role in the analysis of symbolic language, among which is the structural anthropology of Lévi-Strauss. Thus, the terms - more specific to the dialogue established between Paul Ricoeur and Claude Lévi-Strauss on the analysis of the symbolic language of myth - were defined. Finally, this research provides a better understanding of the opening phase of the Ricoeur’s hermeneutics as well as its alignments and divergences with the structuralism of Lévi-Strauss so widespread in the academic field. Keywords: Hermeneutics; Structuralism; Symbol. Divergencia convergente: el diálogo entre Paul Ricoeur y Claude Lévi-Strauss Resumen: Paul Ricoeur propone una filosofía del símbolo, que se encuentra en el umbral de la inserción de la hermenéutica en su filosofía. Decisivo para esta fase fue la interpelación de otras disciplinas que se constituyeron a partir del análisis del lenguaje simbólico, entre las que se encuentra la antropología estructural de Lévi-Strauss. Definimos así los términos específicos del diálogo establecido entre Paul Ricoeur y Claude Lévi-Strauss sobre el análisis del lenguaje simbólico del mito. Esta investigación nos ayudó a comprender mejor la fase de apertura de la hermenéutica ricoeuriana y sus aproximaciones y alejamientos del estructuralismo lévi-straussiano, tan difundido en nuestro campo académico. Palabras clave: Hermenéutica; Estructuralismo; Símbolo. Data de registro: 04/10/2022 Data de aceite: 01/02/2023. (shrink)

In this paper, perhaps the first of its kind, an attempt is made to elucidate and examine the Vedantic theory of soul constructed on the basis of the experience of dreamless sleep which, being radically and qualitatively different from waking and dreaming states, is considered by the Vedantins as a state of temporarily purified individual soul (atman), a state of pure substantial consciousness. They take the experience of dreamless sleep as a model experience of the soul's final liberation from the (...) body and its internal as well as external faculties. The ultimate liberation, according to the Vedantins, is a state of total identification of the individual soul with the Universal Soul (Brahman), the summum bonum of every Vedantin. The paper also includes a critique of the Vedantic soul theory by the Buddhists who vehemently deny any autonomous and substantial soul whose essence is unchangingly permanent, pure consciousness and self-illuminating knowledge. The soul is instead interpreted by the Buddhists as a product of the functioning of a person's psycho-physical organism and a mere subject of knowing, thinking, desiring, etc. The analysis further shows that the Vedanta, especially the Advaita Vedanta, metaphysics of soul is inadequate in many respects and mainly based on a priori and scriptural arguments and emotive appeals, whereas the Buddhists deny any kind of autonomous and permanent agent of knowing, thinking and desiring by successfully reducing substantial consciousness to mere acts of knowing. (shrink)

IN Physics VIII, 10, Aristotle seems to commit a serious mistake: just before concluding that the first mover required by all motion everywhere remains invariable and without parts or magnitude, Aristotle apparently locates this mover on the circumference of the cosmos.

In this paper H. S. Harris argues that it is misguided to suggest that Hegelrsquo;s philosophical project was a dialectical illusion generated by his historical situation and that he would never have believed that his vision was achievable if he had been faced with the world that we face today. Not only does Harris proclaim himself to be a Hegelian, he claims that Hegel would today also remain a Hegelian. He goes on to argue that despite the fragmentation of the (...) twentieth century and the apparent collapse of the vision articulated in the French Revolution, Hegelrsquo;s thinking continues to be relevant because although his philosophy is the lsquo;comprehension of onersquo;s timersquo;, Hegel also produces a philosophy that is out of time and somehow final.br /. (shrink)

The beginnings of Hegel’s interest in “logic” as a branch of philosophy are somewhat obscure. In a lecture of 1830 Schelling claimed that Hegel first began to attend to the subject only because “his friends at the University” suggested that it was a good topic for his lectures because it was being neglected. Schelling’s object by then was evidently to suggest that Hegel’s “logic” had always been a superficial pretense. But Hegel was alive to contradict him. So I think his (...) statement of the facts must be right as far as it goes. I do not therefore believe that Hegel came to Jena with any “logical” manuscripts. In my view, it was Schelling himself—especially in his System of Transcendental Idealism —who sparked Hegel’s interest in the subject. (shrink)

The essay published here in English was one of the earliest documents of the birth of the form of idealism which Giovanni Gentile called “Actual Idealism.” The most celebrated full-length statement of it was published in 1916 as General Theory of the Spirit as Pure Act. But there is no other essay in which the relation between Gentile’s view and the great German tradition from which it derives is made so plain.

The first translation into English and the first detailed interpretation of Hegel’s System der Sittlichkeit and of Philosophie des Geistes, the two earliest surviving versions of Hegel’s social theory. Hegel’s central concept of the spirit evolved in these two works. An 87-page interpretation by Harris precedes the translations.