What Proudhon’s work calls collective reason questions the notion of the general interest in order to distinguish itself from Rousseau’s terminology. The former allows the articulation between individuals and groups through both an anthropological and a deliberative procedure approaches. This conception of socialization will produce the unity that could result from the check and balance in normative terms. Thus, collective reason englobes the totality of social interactions. In the political sphere, the concept allows the understanding of general or collective interest (...) not as the monist unity embodied by the sovereignty of the state, but by a pluralistic unity marked by the autonomy of the collective beings subordinating the state to their service. (shrink)

Ricœur ends his Lectures on Ideology and Utopia by analyzing the works of Saint Simon and Fourier through the lens of the idea of utopia. In taking up these thinkers whom Engels labeled “utopian” socialist, we note that Ricœur did not deal equally with the work of another important socialist: Proudhon. My hypothesis is that it is possible to read Proudhon using Ricœur in that their approaches are similar at a number of points. Fruitful connections can be drawn between the (...) dialectic of the real and ideal developed by Proudhon and Ricœur’s dialectic of ideology and utopia. Both thinkers deal with justice in the form of a certain tension: a tension that for Ricœur requires practical wisdom, and a tension that for Proudhon requires an equilibrium of social and political forces. (shrink)

Proudhon, en effet, pense systématiquement la guerre, loi universelle du genre humain, dans son rapport avec Dieu, c'est-à-dire l'Absolu.