In a famous article published in 1900, Cardinal Mercier drew up a philosophical balance sheet of the previous century. While still showing respect for modern developments, he severely criticized anything that strayed too far from the neo-Thomistic horizon. It is very characteristic that the first object of his criticism is De Bonald’s traditionalism. Mercier says that this type of philosophy is so greatly influenced by the impotence of reason that it hurls itself into the arms of faith. But, “an (...) act of faith cannot be the primordial act of human reason. An individual could not believe unless he first saw that it was reasonable to believe.”It is philosophy that must articulate this rationality. Philosophy must then be a real science; it must pursue rational insight into reality. Unfortunately, some do not believe that philosophy is a science. Instead, they think its task lies elsewhere; it must try to speak where science remains silent. In that case, it is no longer part of science, but belongs to the domain of imagination, faith or dreams. Mercier argues that whoever accepts this, supports Comte’s positivistic prejudice that only the observed positive fact can lie at the basis of a rational and scientific discussion.Mercier stands at the end of a century of unlimited optimism. From a military point of view, the century had been calm. The new sciences that had so intrigued Mercier were marking their first big successes. The century’s optimism is recognizable in the 1889 charter establishing the Thomistic Higher Institute of Philosophy, which Mercier served as president: “far from bringing dogmas in danger, scientific insights stimulate a wondrous growth in enlightened insight; for they both come from the same God, origin of both revelation and universe.” Mercier’s tonality lies not far distant from Renan’s L’avenir de la science, where he complains that there are people who choose bon ton, superstition and frivolity above meticulous research, but predicts that their success is ephemeral and that the time of rationality will dawn.The next century, however, took an unexpected turn. Who would have thought in 1900 that history, which had been set so firmly on the track of reason, would derail so terribly? No great philosopher predicted the coming catastrophes. The only warnings came from a few nineteenth-century traditionalist Cassandras who went to extremes in linking modernity and decay: Donoso Cortes, Joseph de Maistre and Louis De Bonald. Who predicted the arrival of enlightenment criticism in intellectual history? Who predicted that we would not see history becoming reasonable, but reason historical? Who could have predicted twentieth-century contextualism and its claim that reason is not the criterion of culture but only one element within culture indebted to an entire sociocultural context? All this can be found in De Bonald’s traditionalism that has proven paradoxically more up-to-date than the naïve trust in rationality found in Mercier and Renan.Yet, De Bonald did not intend to preach a form of irrationalism. His purpose was to accent reason’s dependence, and by extension, humankind’s intellectual solidarity: thought is impossible without language, language does not exist without a listener, there is no listener without education, there is no education without social life. Using this reasoning, De Bonald ultimately wants to prove that reason intrinsically refers to revelation, since in this chain, the first word cannot come from humankind.He supports this with an epistemological argument that contextualizes reason in a way that is almost contemporary: “A person has to think his word before saying it. Therefore, he cannot find without thinking, and cannot think without signs. He is compelled to have recourse to something other than the human.” Leuven’s variant of this traditionalism emphasizes that reason develops only in and through language, thus by being included in a community. By comparison, Mercier’s realistic concept of rationality sounds old-fashioned. It is traditionalism that best fits with the contemporary accent on reason’s historicity and culture-related status.The development of ethics also runs counter to Mercier’s expectations. There has been no growth in rationality but a growing insight into the historicity of reason. In the article already cited, Mercier criticizes Kant for not being sufficiently foundational, since he does not rely on a speculative-metaphysical foundation: “What kind of ethic is it that cannot be theoretically justified?” In our time, the roles are reversed. Many ethicists condemn Kant because he tries to find this foundation! How are we to understand this turn-about in ethics? (shrink)

Alexandre Koyré a réuni trois ans avant sa mort (1964) ces Etudes d'histoire de la pensée philosophique. On retrouve ici la curiosité inlassable de l'auteur des Etudes newtoniennes, qui nous livre une histoire de la pensée philosophique de Zénon à Martin Heidegger, de Spinoza à Condorcet et à Louis de Bonald. L'auteur aborde à la fois les questions sur le vide et l'espace infini au XIVe siècle, celles sur le temps d'après la Logique d'Iéna, dont la doctrine inspirera (...) la phénoménologie de Husserl, de Heidegger et de Sartre, et d'autres sur la langue et la terminologie hégéliennes. (shrink)

RésuméAprès avoir rappeléľorigine et le sens de la notion de compleAmentarité introduite par Bohr en Physique quantique et avoir fait allusion aux diverses extensions qui en ont déjàété proposées, ľauteur cherche à appliquer ľidée de complémentarité aux relations qui existent entre les constituants ?un système et le système entier. La perte ?individualité subie par les constituants ?un système et traduîte en Mécanique classique par la notion ?énergie potentielle s'accentue au fur et à mesure que la liaison des constituants dans le (...) système devient plus étroite. Ľétude de la mécanique ondulatoire des systèmes confirme ľidée qu'il existe une sorte de complémentarité entre ľidée de constituant autonome et celle de système. L. de B. (shrink)

Les troubles de mémoire sont un motif fréquent de consultation dans les services de gériatrie, psychiatrie ou neurologie. Ils sont pour beaucoup synonymes d’un mot terrible : Alzheimer. Dès l’apparition de troubles mnésiques, chacun s’interroge : « Est-ce l’âge, ou bien la maladie? Puis-je panser ma mémoire, ou vais-je dériver avec elle? » Les docteurs Emmanuelle Candas et Bruno Le Dastumer, gériatres, spécialistes des troubles de la mémoire, font un état des lieux de la maladie d’Alzheimer et répondent à ces (...) interrogations : comment faire la différence entre le vieillissement naturel du cerveau et les troubles mnésiques pathologiques? Existe-t-il un traitement pour soigner la maladie d’Alzheimer? Et surtout, comment accompagner le malade, dès le diagnostic établi? (shrink)

La pensée chrétienne est le plus souvent mal perçue, mal considérée, caricaturée et même défigurée, parce que mal comprise. Il appartenait à René Girard de remettre les pendules à l'heure en montrant qu'elle a porté au plus haut point la religion comme mode de gestion de la violence ou 'science de la violence', comme dénonciation de la violence- programmation d'autant plus salutaire dans un monde de plus en plus violent. Cette grille de lecture permit à René Girard d'éclairer d'un jour (...) nouveau l'esprit du christianisme, du judaïsme et même du paganisme. Elle nous invite à reconsidérer la pensée chrétienne par l'appel, à titre d'exemples, à quelques séquences significatives, celles de Saint Thomas d'Aquin, Joseph de Maistre et Louis de Bonald, celles de Hegel, Claude Tresmontant et Dostoïevski. (shrink)

This paper proposes a pragmatic solution to utterances where the various indicators of time and aspect (tenses, lexical-conceptual features of Aktionsart, adverb phrases and contextual cues) seem to have divergent temporal reference and aspectual properties. This type of cases is usually treated at the semantic level as ‘mismatches’ and resolved compositionally through logical operations of ‘aspectual coercion’. We suggest on the contrary that no such effect of ‘mismatch resolution’ or ‘coercion’ is at work: these utterances are worked out inferentially according (...) to the various pieces of evidence they provide for their relevance, in line of Deirdre Wilson’s and Dan Sperber’s (1995) relevance theory. Such utterances give rise to cognitive effects that are hardly attainable by apparently more literal formulations, while being cost-effective. Our analysis follows the work ofEscandell-Vidal and Leonetti (2011)about the rigidity and thus prevalence of computational linguistic expressions, called ‘procedural expressions’ byBlakemore (1987)withinSperber and Wilson’s (1995[1986])framework, relevance theory. (shrink)

Der in Chambéry geborene Joseph de Maistre ist, mit Louis-Ambroise de Bonald, einer der vehementesten Gegner der Französischen Revolution. Seine 1796 veröffentlichten Considérations sur la France schließen sich an Burkes Considerations on the Revolution in France an, übertreffen diese aber noch an Vehemenz, bedingt vor allem durch de Maistres ultramontane Einstellungen. In seinem posthum veröffentlichten De la souveraineté populaire setzt sich de Maistre polemisch mit Rousseaus Thesen auseinander, in denen er den Keim der Revolution sieht.

O objetivo deste trabalho é desenvolver uma reflexão a respeito da leitura feita por Carl Schmitt dos intelectuais católicos como filósofos de Estado da contrarrevolução. Pontualmente, o trabalho concentra-se na relação estabelecida por Carl Schmitt entre Teologia Política e Constituição, a partir da análise das reflexões De Maistre e De Bonald, em especial no que diz respeito a leitura teológico-política de categorias centrais da teoria da constituição, como, por exemplo, a questão do poder constituinte e da constituição da ordem, (...) uma reflexão crítica de tais categorias não para restaurar a monarquia, mas, sim, apontando para a defesa da ditadura. Assim, partindo de um método hermenêutico, foram analisados os textos de bibliografia primária e, doravante, obras outras de interlocutores, bem como outros autores que se dedicaram ao problema em análise. (shrink)

Der in Chambéry geborene Joseph de Maistre ist, mit Louis-Ambroise de Bonald, einer der vehementesten Gegner der Französischen Revolution. Seine 1796 veröffentlichten Considérations sur la France schließen sich an Burkes Considerations on the Revolution in France an, übertreffen diese aber noch an Vehemenz, bedingt vor allem durch de Maistres ultramontane Einstellungen. In seinem posthum veröffentlichten De la souveraineté populaire setzt sich de Maistre polemisch mit Rousseaus Thesen auseinander, in denen er den Keim der Revolution sieht.

Montesquieu's The Spirit of Laws is an enduring classic of social and political theory deserving a fresh reading every generation. The modern reader, however, is likely to find a work that ran to over a thousand pages in its two-volume first edition a bit overwhelming. Presented here, therefore, is the first English-language compendium of The Spirit of Laws, together with the first English translation of the posthumously published treatise containing the physiological theory underlying Montesquieu's theory of climate.

Intellectual historians have tended to focus on the most radical intellectuals of the counter-revolution such as Joseph de Maistre and Louis de Bonald, but the counter-revolution was an intellectually composite movement with many intellectual currents and ideas. In this article, I shed light on the composite character of the counter-revolution by focusing on one of its most moderate members, the comte de Montlosier. The article presents contextualised analysis of Montlosier’s conception of moderation, his theory of politics, his critique (...) of fellow counter-revolutionaries, and his ideas for a new aristocratic order build on public opinion and separation of powers. I argue that Montlosier’s moderate politics reflected a moderate enlightenment approach to politics, which was neither wholly rationalist nor wholly traditionalist. Rather, it was an attempt to find a middle ground between the two integrating a conservative view of history with a sociological approach to power and politics. I furthermore argue that even if Montlosier was unsuccessful in his endeavours to moderate the counter-revolution, he nonetheless provided a moderate response to it that would become integral to nineteenth-century conservative and liberal ideas. (shrink)