Editorial introduction to the special issue on the work of Castoriadis.

The article approximates some of the foundations of Cornelius Castoriadis's understanding of social-historical, guided by a theoretical-sociological perspective. I try to think in what senses Castoriadis's social ontology consideration can help us to rethink and eventually reconfigure the domain of social-theoretical reflection on the world. At the same time, an attempt is made to measure the extent of the reordering that the presuppositions of this ontology imply for the presuppositional level-ontological, epistemological, and methodological elements - and the theoretical (...) level - categories, concepts, and general statements-in sociology. The text closes, programmatically, with some problems and challenges that Castoriadis' thought bequeaths to the theoretical-social reflection on the world. (shrink)

Maffesoli) Este Diccionario intenta articular en torno al tema de la existencia, los aspectos relevantes y asuntos fundamentales de la vida humana.

«La relación entre la vida y el pensamiento supone una dificultad constante para la teoría.» «[...] la vida se despliega al margen del pensamiento [...] Se trata de observar la vida sin prejuicios, sin premoniciones, en suma, sin nada que la clausure a priori». Este Diccionario intenta articular en torno al tema de la existencia, los aspectos relevantes y asuntos fundamentales de la vida humana. La vida en correlación con la muerte, el amor y el odio, la felicidad y el (...) sufrimiento, lo divino y lo demoníaco, lo espiritual y lo material, lo sublime y lo abyecto, la sabiduría, la caducidad, la persona, el hombre, la mujer, la soledad... (shrink)

Reviews : C.L.R. James, World Revolution 1917-1936: The Rise and Fall of the Communist International ; Michel Beaud, Socialism in the Crucible of History ; Cornelius Castoriadis, Political and Social Writings, Volume 3, 1961- 1979 ; Moishe Postone, Time, Labor, and Social Domination—A Reinterpretation of Marx's Critical Tbeory.

L’article est un examen critique de l’œuvre de Cornelius Castoriadis. Tout au long de sa vie, aussi bien par l’histoire des idées que par l’étude des situations socio-historiques, sa préoccupation centrale a toujours été d’établir le caractère créateur de l’action humaine. Mais dans sa réhabilitation intellectuelle de la création, Castoriadis donne en dernière instance le primat aux dimensions psychiques sur les dimensions sociales. C’est ce parcours et les principales conséquences sociologiques qu’il induit qui retiendront notre attention. Son œuvre (...) permet à la fois de souligner les limites d’une vision déterministe de l’action, et les insuffisances d’une perspective prométhéenne d’analyse de la vie sociale.The article is a critical study of Cornelius Castoriadis’s work. All his life, due to the history of ideas as well as the study of sociohistorical situations, his main concern has always been to establish the creative nature of human action. Yet in his intellectual rehabilitation of creation, Castoriadis finally favours psychic dimensions over social dimensions. This article focuses on this evolution and on its main sociological consequences. His work allows us to underline the limits of a determinist vision of action and the shortcomings of a promethean analysis of social life. (shrink)

Si l’on connaît aujourd’hui le dialogue fructueux que Paul Ricœur a noué avec les penseurs structuralistes, on ignore largement son positionnement face à la mouvance poststructuraliste. Faut-il opposer la philosophie de Ricœur au poststructuralisme à la française ou au contraire doit-on montrer qu’elle en est une variante singulière? C’est la seconde option qui est ici défendue. Certes, le poststructuralisme ne doit pas être considéré comme une école de pensée mais comme une reconstruction qui relève de l’histoire de la philosophie. Dans (...) la mesure où les horizons de dépassement du structuralisme ont été posés de manière chaque fois particulière, il est préférable de parler de poststructuralismes au pluriel. C’est la raison pour laquelle J. Michel propose des confrontations dyadiques entre Ricœur et certains de ses contemporains que l’on regroupe habituellement dans cette mouvance. (shrink)

Venu du marxisme, dont il a constaté très tôt les impasses, Cornelius Castoriadis a voulu réinventer la révolution. Selon lui, la modernité voit s'affronter deux projets de société : celui d'une maîtrise rationnelle du réel et celui d'une autonomie de toutes et de tous. Le premier a donné des résultats désastreux en engendrant le règne de la technique et de l'économie. Le second reste encore à construire pour qu'advienne une société vraiment démocratique dans laquelle le peuple se gouverne lui-même, (...) se passant de toute classe dirigeante. Castoriadis a mis en lumière les origines de ce projet d'autonomie qui remontent à la Grèce antique. Il en a analysé les expressions modernes, de la révolution russe de 1917 aux révoltes des années 1960. Mais surtout, il en a examiné les conditions pour que se développe une politique émancipatrice aujourd'hui : auto-organisation des luttes, pratique de l'égalité et sens des limites. Ce projet d'autonomie n'est pas un programme clés en main. Il est un imaginaire autant qu'une expérience. Il est un horizon, celui d'une société consciente du fait que le pouvoir est l'affaire de tous. C'est cette réflexion multiforme et souvent complexe que présente et questionne ce livre qui offre pour la première fois une synthèse claire, accessible et percutante de la pensée politique de Castoriadis. (shrink)

En philosophie comme en d'autres domaines, la puissance de l'Absolu semble bien à présent nous être refusée. Sa relève s'est vue opposer non seulement la violence de la révolte, mais la pluralité invincible des perspectives finies et la reconnaissance raisonnable de l'irréductible multiplicité du patrimoine spirituel de l'humanité. Tout se passe comme si nous avions pris conscience que l'intrigue première n'était pas celle de la pensée et de ses catégories essentielles, mais celle de la liberté et de ses attitudes existentielles. (...) Les questions ultimes ne disparaissent pas pour autant, mais elles échappent désormais aux prétentions magistrales d'une théorie unique. C'est seulement du dialogue, toujours à reprendre, des libertés en quête de raison que peut renaître, sans trop d'illusions, la visée d'un sens de l'existence qui ne peut que se diffracter en perspectives multiples. C'est dans cet esprit que Francis Guibal met en vis-à-vis Cornelius Castoriadis et André Stanguennec sur " histoire et libertés " ; Henri Bergson et Franz Rosenzweig sur " expérience et transcendance " ; Jacques Derrida et Jean-Luc Nancy sur " déconstruction et création " ; René Girard, Paul Ricoeur et Catherine Chalier sur " Le religieux en héritage(s) ". (shrink)

Avec le premier volume d’une future trilogie consacrée respectivement aux trois principaux « carrefours » du « penser » de Cornelius Castoriadis (C. C.), la polis, la psychè et le logos, Sophie Klimis (S. K.) nous propose en réalité une enquête sur notre modernité à travers la notion castoriadienne de « figure du pensable (eidos) social-historique ». Selon elle, l’un des mérites de C. C. est d’avoir saisi que notre modernité est complexe, articulant à une « modernité des Modernes (...) », le capita... (shrink)

This book collects 12 previously untranslated lectures by Castoriadis from 1982 to 1983. Castoriadis focuses on the interconnection between philosophy and democracy and the way both emerge within a self-critical imaginary already in development in the work of early Greek poets and Presocratic philosophers. Displaying both mastery of the relevant scholarship and original interpretation, he reveals the birth of a society that would place its highest value in calling itself and its institutions into question. He argues that this (...) spirit would develop directly into the twin signatures of the Greek world, namely radical philosophy, on the one hand, and radical democratic practices, on the other. Like no previous interpreter, Castoriadis allows us to feel the existential need, already present in the earliest Greek thinkers, to question the significance of human existence and to share in shaping its meaning. The Greeks not only did this, he argues, they also began the equally important work of establishing the institutions to support such a project"-- Back cover. (shrink)

As a work of social theory, I would argue that it belongs in a class with the writings of Habermas and Arendt". -- Jay Bernstein, University of Essex This is one of the most original and important works of contemporary European thought.

This collection presents a broad and compelling overview of the most recent work by a world-renowned figure in contemporary thought. The book is in four parts: Koinonia, Polis, Psyche, Logos. The opening section begins with a general introduction to the author's views on being, time, creation, and the imaginary institution of society and continues with reflections on the role of the individual psyche in racist thinking and acting. The second part is a critique of those who now belittle and distort (...) the meaning of May 1968 and other movements of the sixties as well as the French Revolution. In part three, Castoriadis shows how psychoanalysis, like politics, can contribute to the project of individual and collective autonomy and challenges Lacan, Foucault, and Derrida, and others in his report on 'The State and Subject Today'. Finally he examines how Aristotle's original aporetic discovery and cover-up of the imagination were repeated by Kant, Freud, Heidegger, and even Merleau-Ponty. (shrink)

“Probably Peirce’s best-known works are the first two articles in a series of six that originally were collectively entitled Illustrations of the Logic of Science and published in Popular Science Monthly from November 1877 through August 1878. The first is entitled ‘The Fixation of Belief’ and the second is entitled ‘How to Make Our Ideas Clear.’ In the first of these papers Peirce defended, in a manner consistent with not accepting naive realism, the superiority of the scientific method over other (...) methods of overcoming doubt and ‘fixing belief.’” — Robert Burch, “Charles Sanders Peirce,” entry in the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (2021 revision) -/- “Pragmatist epistemologies often explore how we can carry out inquiries in a self-controlled and fruitful way. (Where much analytic epistemology centres around the concept of knowledge, considered as an idealised end-point of human thought, pragmatist epistemology centres around the concept of inquiry, considered as the process of knowledge-seeking and how we can improve it.) So pragmatists often provide rich accounts of the capacities or virtues that we must possess in order to inquire well, and the rules or guiding principles that we should adopt. A canonical account is Peirce’s classic early paper ‘The Fixation of Belief‘. Here Peirce states that inquiry is a struggle to replace doubt with “settled belief“, and that the only method of inquiry that can make sense of the fact that at least some of us are disturbed by inconsistent beliefs, and will subsequently reflect upon which methods of fixing belief are correct is the Method of Science, which draws on the Pragmatic Maxim described above. This contrasts with three other methods of fixing belief: i) refusing to consider evidence contrary to one’s favored beliefs (the Method of Tenacity), ii) accepting an institution’s dictates (the Method of Authority), iii) developing the most rationally coherent or elegant-seeming belief-set (the A Priori Method).“ — Catherine Legg, “Pragmatism,” entry in the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (2021 revision). (shrink)

According to most accounts of trust, you can only trust other people (or groups of people). To trust is to think that another has goodwill, or something to that effect. I sketch a different form of trust: the unquestioning attitude. What it is to trust, in this sense, is to settle one’s mind about something, to stop questioning it. To trust is to rely on a resource while suspending deliberation over its reliability. Trust lowers the barrier of monitoring, challenging, checking, (...) and questioning. Trust sets up open pipelines between yourself and parts of the external world. Trust permits external resources to have a similar relationship to one as one’s internal cognitive faculties. This creates efficiency, but at the price of exquisite vulnerability. We must trust in this way because we are cognitively limited beings in a cognitively overwhelming world. Crucially, we can hold the unquestioning attitude towards objects and technologies. When I trust my climbing rope, I stop worrying about its reliability. When I trust my online calendaring system, I simply go to the events indicated, without question. But, one might worry, how could one ever hold such a normatively loaded attitude as trust towards mere objects? How could it ever make sense to feel betrayed by an object? Trust is our engine for expanding and outsourcing our agency — for binding external processes into our practical selves. Thus, we can be betrayed by our smartphones in the same way that we can be betrayed by our memory. When we trust, we try to make something a part of our agency, and we are betrayed when our part lets us down. To unquestioningly trust something is to let it in—to attempt to bring it inside one’s practical functioning. This suggests a new form of gullibility: agential gullibility, which occurs when agents too hastily and carelessly integrate external resources into their own agency. (shrink)

These remarkable essays include Cornelius Castoriadis's latest contributions to philosophy, political and social theory, classical studies, development theory, cultural criticism, science, and ecology. Examining the "co-birth" in ancient Greece of philosophy and politics, Castoriadis shows how the Greeks' radical questioning of established ideas and institutions gave rise to the "project of autonomy". The "end of philosophy" proclaimed by Postmodernism would mean the end of this project. That end is now hastened by the lethal expansion of technoscience, the waning (...) of political and social conflict, and the resignation of intellectuals who blindly defend Western culture as it is or who merely denounce or "deconstruct" it as it has been. Discussing and criticizing Plato, Aristotle, Leibniz, Kant, Hegel, Weber, Heidegger, and Habermas, the author of The Imaginary Institution of Society and Crossroads in the Labyrinth poses a radical challenge to our inherited philosophy. (shrink)

In this posthumous collection of writings, Cornelius Castoriadis (1922-1997) pursues his incisive analysis of modern society, the philosophical basis of our ability to change it, and the points of intersection between his many approaches to this theme. His main philosophical postulate, that the human subject and society are not predetermined, asserts the primacy of creation and the possibility of creative, autonomous activity in every domain. This argument is combined with penetrating political and social criticism, opening numerous avenues of critical (...) thought and action. The book’s wide-ranging topics include the core worldview of ancient Athens, where the idea of self-creation and self-limitation made democracy possible; the wealth of poetic resources; a deconstruction of the so-called rationality of capitalism and of the current conception of democracy, along with a discussion of what a radical, revolutionary project means today; the role of what he calls the radical imagination in the creation of both societal institutions and history; the roots of hate; a psychoanalytic view of human development torn between heteronomy and autonomy; the role of education in forming autonomous individuals; and notions of chaos, space, and number. (shrink)

Value capture occurs when an agent’s values are rich and subtle; they enter a social environment that presents simplified — typically quantified — versions of those values; and those simplified articulations come to dominate their practical reasoning. Examples include becoming motivated by FitBit’s step counts, Twitter Likes and Re-tweets, citation rates, ranked lists of best schools, and Grade Point Averages. We are vulnerable to value capture because of the competitive advantage that such crisp and clear expressions of value have in (...) our private reasoning and our public justification. There is, however, a price. In value capture, we take a central component of our autonomy — our ongoing deliberation over the exact articulation of our values — and we outsource it. And the metrics to which we outsource usually engineered for the interests of some external force, like a large-scale institution’s interest in cross-contextual comprehensibility and quick aggregability. That outsourcing cuts off one of the key benefits to personal deliberation. In value capture, we no longer adjust our values and their articulations in light of own rich experience of the world. Our values should often be carefully tailored to our particular selves or our small-scale communities, but in value capture, we buy our values off the rack. In some cases – like decreasing CO2 emissions – the costs of non-tailored values are outweighed by the benefit of precise collective coordination. In other cases, like in our aesthetic lives, they are not. This suggests that we should want different values suited to different scales. We should want value federalism. Some values are perhaps best pursued at the largest-scale level, others at smaller scales. The problem occurs when we exhibit an excess preference for the largest-scale values – when we consistently let the universal metrics swamp our quieter interests. (shrink)

Cornelius Castoriadis is a fascinating figure, not only because of his personal and intellectual background, but because of the extraordinary breadth of his interests and his ability to play the brilliant intellectual jester - all characteristics in abundant evidence in this collection of essays. In them, Castoriadis goes to the heart of deep philosophical issues raised but not answered by modern thought.The book presents his concerns with the development of analytical theories of psychology, language, and politics, all commonly (...) rooted in the social and historical aspects of human creativity. It examines figures as diverse as Aristotle, Heidegger, Lacan, Marx, and Merleau-Ponty.Cornelius Castoriadis was for a long time a professional economist and is now a practicing psychoanalyst in Paris. He founded and became the main theoretician for the independent journal of the left, Socialisme ou Barbarie. (shrink)

In the intellectual confusion prevailing since the demise of Marxism and “marxism”, the attempt is made to define democracy as a matter of pure procedure, explicitly avoiding and condemning any reference to substantive objectives. It can easily be shown, however, that the idea of a purely procedural “democracy” is incoherent and self‐contradictory. No legal system whatsoever and no government can exist in the absence of substantive conditions which cannot be left to chance or to the workings of the “market” but (...) must be posited as objectives of political activity. The confusion results from a deficient understanding of what makes a society and an empty idea of “freedom”. The objective of politics is not happiness, an affair to be left to the individuals, but it certainly is liberty understood as participation in the governance of the polity; it is also the pursuit of the common good, defined as the sum of the prerequisites and facilitations of individual autonomy depending on collective action, and as the realization of commonly agreed collective goals. (shrink)

Recent conversation has blurred two very different social epistemic phenomena: echo chambers and epistemic bubbles. Members of epistemic bubbles merely lack exposure to relevant information and arguments. Members of echo chambers, on the other hand, have been brought to systematically distrust all outside sources. In epistemic bubbles, other voices are not heard; in echo chambers, other voices are actively undermined. It is crucial to keep these phenomena distinct. First, echo chambers can explain the post-truth phenomena in a way that epistemic (...) bubbles cannot. Second, each type of structure requires a distinct intervention. Mere exposure to evidence can shatter an epistemic bubble, but may actually reinforce an echo chamber. Finally, echo chambers are much harder to escape. Once in their grip, an agent may act with epistemic virtue, but social context will pervert those actions. Escape from an echo chamber may require a radical rebooting of one's belief system. (shrink)

This volume translates Castoriadis's dialogues on politics, ethics, culture, and aesthetics with important intellectual figures including Francisco Varela, Octavio Paz, and others.