Arguing against the prevailing view that Cartesian dualism is fundamental to understanding Descartes' philosophy, Gordon Baker and Katherine Morris present a controversial examination of Descartes' philosophy. As the first full-length study of Descartes' conception of the person, Baker and Morris depart radically from traditional representations of Descartes'argument about the persona, the cogito, and the alleged "mind/body" dualism. Contesting the nearly institutionalized view that Cartesian duality is central to understanding Descartes, Baker and Morris illuminate how this "reading" has been ascribed mistakenly (...) and erroneously to Descartes. Controversially, they show how this interpretation has led to abuse both within philosophy and beyond it. Refusing to draw a distinction between the mind and the body in traditional ways, Baker and Morris open up interesting ways of conceptualizing both ourselves and philosophy itself. (shrink)

이 글은 데카르트의 수동적 물체론과 운동학에서의 힘 개념을 웨스트폴과 하트필드의 대립적인 해석과 함께 논구해보고자 한다. 웨스트폴은 데카르트의 물체론에 동역학적인 요소가 있다고 보았으며, 그로 인해 데카르트의 물체론이 모순에 빠진다고 비판하였다. 이에 대해 하트필드는 데카르트의 물체론은 그의 형이상학과 함께 이해되어야 한다고 보았으며, 이러한 관점을 가지지 못한 웨스트폴을 비판하였다. 하트필드에 따르면, 웨스트폴은 데카르트의 형이상학보다 자연학과 운동 법칙 자체를 더 중점적으로 생각했고, 그럼으로써 데카르트의 물체론을 데카르트의 전체 체계 내에서 통합적으로 사유하지 못했다. 이 글은 하트필드의 입장을 지지하며 데카르트의 수동적 물체론이 내포한 형이상학적 기초를 확인함으로써, 데카르트의 (...) 물체론과 형이상학을 함께 사유하는 것의 의의를 확인하고자 한다. 이는 갈등론적 관점에서 한 이론에 대한 두 대립적인 해석이 빚는 갈등이 갖는 가치 또한 시사할 것이다. (shrink)

Machines and Biology have been, since antiquity, closely related. From the zoological figures present in astronomical simulacra, through renaissance mechanical imitations of animals, through Decartes' wind pipe nerves, to present day discussions on the computer and the brain, runs a continuous thread. In fact, the very name of mechanism for an attitude of inquiry throughout the history of Biology reveals this at a philosophical level. More often than not, mechanism is mentioned in opposition to vitalism, as an assertion of (...) the validity of the objectivity principle in biology: there are no purposes in animal nature; its apparent purposefulness is similar to the purposefulness of machines. Yet, the fact that one picks machines as a set of objects comparable to living systems, deserves a closer look. What in machines makes it possible to establish such a connection? (shrink)

My aim … is to show that the celestial machine is likened not to a kind of divine living being but rather to a clockwork. I consider the human body to be a machine … Although it may exaggerate to say that Descartes fathered the mechanization of biology, it is true that his Treatise of Man provided the first systematic development of the idea that a complete understanding of all the phenomena of life, including all abilities and behaviour of animals, (...) can be achieved by viewing living things as machines. To make this out, Decartes had to learn to think about living things in a new way. My first aim here is to identify the fundamental conceptual innovations at work in Descartes’ attempt to extend the new mechanics to include biology. My second aim is to locate the point at which Descartes’ mechanical imagination runs out. This requires study of Descartes’ scientific work on sense. (shrink)

Nach Auffassung einiger Autoren wie Alvin Goldman und William Alston setzt normative Erkenntnistheorie einen erkenntnistheoretischen Voluntarismus voraus, der besagt, daß epistemische Verhaltensweisen wie Glauben, Urteilen, Urteilsenthaltung willentliche Handlungen sind. Normen können dann auf diese Verhaltensweisen einwirken, indem wir den Normen willentlich Folge leisten. Gegen diesen Voluntarismus spricht aber die Beobachtung, daß epistemische Verhaltensweisen in den meisten Fällen keine willentlichen Handlungen sind. Descartes' wurde von beiden genannten Autoren als ein typischer Vertreter eines normativen Ansatzes angesehen, der diesen unhaltbaren Voluntarismus voraussetzt. Ich (...) werde dafür argumentieren, daß Decartes kein erkenntnistheoretischer Voluntarist war und seine normative Erkenntnistheorie diesen Voluntarismus auch nicht voraussetzt. Inbesondere wird gezeigt, daß Descartes in Bezug auf die für ihn zentralen epistemischen Verhaltensweisen des Urteilens und der Urteilsenthaltung kein Voluntarist war. Descartes' Vorstellungen von der Wirkungsweise erkenntnistheoretischer Normen erweisen sich als denen von Goldman ähnlich. (shrink)

What is the body? How was it culturally constructed, conceived, and cultivated before and after the advent of rationalism and modern science? This interdisciplinary study elaborates a cultural genealogy of the body and its legacies to modernity by tracing its crucial redefinition from a live anatomical entity to disembodied, mechanical and virtual analogs. The study ranges from Baroque, pre-Cartesian interpretations of body and embodiment, to the Cartesian elaboration of ontological difference and mind-body dualism, and it concludes with the parodic and (...) violent aftermath of this legacy to the French Enlightenment. It engages work by philosophical authors such as Montaigne, Descartes and La Mettrie, as well as literary works by d'Urfé, Corneille and the Marquis de Sade. The examination of sexuality and the emergence of sexual difference as a dominant mode of embodiment are central to the book's overall design. The work is informed by philosophical accounts of the body (Nietzsche, Foucault, Merleau-Ponty), by feminist theory (Butler, Irigaray, Bordo), as well as by literary and cultural historians (Scarry, Stewart, Bynum, etc.) and historians of science (Canguilhem, Pagel, and Temkin), among others. It will appeal to scholars of literature, philosophy, French studies, critical theory, feminist theory, cultural historians and historians of science and technology. Dalia Judovitz is Professor of French, Emory University. She is also author of Unpacking Duchamp: Art in Transit and Subjectivity and Representation in Decartes: The Origins of Modernity. (shrink)

This is an English translation of Descartes' seminal discourse, with an original essay by Richard Kennington. This text is designed to provide the student with a close translation, notes, and a glossary of key terms, facilitating access to ideas as they originally were presented and helping to make the translator's work transparent. Focus Philosophical Library translations are close to and are non-interpretative of the original text, with the notes and a glossary intending to provide the reader with some sense of (...) the terms and the concepts as they were understood by Decartes' immediate audience. The Focus Philosophical Library publishes clear, faithful editions enabling access for modern students to the essential ideas and wisdom of the world’s greatest thinkers. (shrink)

The aim of the article is to critically assess the widespread surmise according to which Descartes was in certain important aspects of his thought infl uenced by Suárez’s Metaphysical Disputations. In the article this question is addressed with regard to the problem of the ontological background of the representational acts of a finite mind. Descartes’ position is reconstructed on the basis of an analysis of Meditation III and consequently of Descartes’ polemic with Johan de Kater in the First Objections and (...) Replies; the reconstruction is accomplished by means of terms and concepts commonly used in the late scholastic thought of the end of the 16th century. An analysis of the key passage of Section 2 of Disputation 54 of the Metaphysical Disputations of Suárez (concerned with the distinction between extrinsic denominations and beings of reason) then shows, first, that Suárez’s position concerning the ontology of mental representation does indeed agree with that of Descartes, not Kater; second, that the implications of Suárez’s critique of certain theses concerning the identity of extrinsic denominations and beings of reason probably form an important part of the conceptual framework presupposed in the polemic between Decartes and Kater. (shrink)

Engaging the World explores Luce Irigaray’s writings on sexual difference, deploying the resources of her work to rethink philosophical concepts and commitments and expose new possibilities of vitality in relationship to nature, others, and to one’s self. The contributors present a range of perspectives from multiple disciplines such as philosophy, literature, education, evolutionary theory, sound technology, science and technology, anthropology, and psychoanalysis. They place Irigaray in conversation with thinkers as diverse as Charles Darwin, Claude Lévi-Strauss, Gilles Deleuze, René Decartes, (...) and Avital Ronell. While every essay challenges Irigaray’s thought in some way, each one also reveals the transformative effects of her thought across multiple domains of contemporary life. (shrink)

ArgumentFrom the time of al-Khwārizmī in the ninth century to the beginning of the sixteenth century algebraists did not allow irrational numbers to serve as coefficients. To multiply$\sqrt {18} $byx, for instance, the result was expressed as the rhetorical equivalent of$\sqrt {18{x^2}} $. The reason for this practice has to do with the premodern concept of a monomial. The coefficient, or “number,” of a term was thought of as how many of that term are present, and not as the scalar (...) multiple that we work with today. Then, in sixteenth-century Europe, a few algebraists began to allow for irrational coefficients in their notation. Christoff Rudolff was the first to admit them in special cases, and subsequently they appear more liberally in Cardano, Scheubel, Bombelli, and others, though most algebraists continued to ban them. We survey this development by examining the texts that show irrational coefficients and those that argue against them. We show that the debate took place entirely in the conceptual context of premodern, “cossic” algebra, and persisted in the sixteenth century independent of the development of the new algebra of Viète, Decartes, and Fermat. This was a formal innovation violating prevailing concepts that we propose could only be introduced because of the growing autonomy of notation from rhetorical text. (shrink)

Human concern over the urgency of current environmental issues increasingly entails wide-ranging discussions of how we may rethink the relationship between humans and the rest of the natural world. In order to provide a context for such discussions this anthology provides a selection of some of the most important, interesting and influential readings on the subject from classical times through to the late nineteenth century. Included are such figures as Xenophon, Plato, Aristotle, Hildegard of Bingen, St Francis of Assisi, Bacon, (...) Decartes, Kant, Mill, Emerson and Thoreau. As the collection as a whole amply demonstrates, the history of western philosophical accounts of nature can help us to better understand current attitudes and problems. Human Life and the Natural World may also be of interest to a broad range of philosophers and students of philosophy, and more generally to those with a concern for the environment that engages the intellect as well as the heart. (shrink)

A crise dos modelos de representação fundadas em unidades coerentes e ordenadas parece ter como um dos traços o que Bruno Latour (1993) chamou de “híbridos”(1). Os híbridos são a figura da multiplicidade que não cabe em categorias e que a modernidade “varia para baixo do tapete”. Atualmente, assistimos ao “retorno dos que nunca foram”, que interpelam de forma contundente nossas formas de vida, fortemente apoiadas na técnica. Mas como apreender os fluxos de discursos e práticas mediatizadas que nos atravessam (...) sem cair nas armadilhas do tecnicismo? Que configurações poderiam hoje assumir práticas e discursos críticos? Que agenciamentos propor? Tentar compreender o estatuto do tecnológico, do político, do artístico, do urbano e do banal como “artes do fazer” parece-nos uma tarefa urgente e necessária. Gilles Deleuze (1977), em “Kafka, por uma literatura menor” (2), deixa-nos uma importante pista, ao afirmar, em sua definição de agenciamento, que “a técnica é antes de tudo social”. A direção nos permite avançar para além das concepções instrumentalistas e dicotômicas da técnica e percebê-la enquanto processo complexo de mediação. De fato, como também afirmava Simondon (1989), os objetos técnicos sempre foram gerados por mediação e geradores de mediação(4). O presente número da Revista Logos traz justamente contribuições para fomentar esse debate e para compor o já vasto quadro das cartografias sobre tecnologia e sociabilidade no Brasil, no campo das possibilidades de mediação sociotécnica. Trata-se de um número especial, organizado dentro da parceria PPGC-Uerj e Centre d’Etudes sur l”Actuel et lê Quotidien (CEAQ) - Paris V, com a colaboração do Professor Stéphane Hugon, coordenador do GRETECH, grupo de pesquisa sobre Tecnologia e Quotidiano. Se, por um lado, o conjunto de artigos compartilha determinados referenciais teóricos, por outro, acolhe também visões próprias, forjadas a partir de diferentes experiências sociais e em distintos contextos culturais. Em comum, todos partem de certa forma da percepção de que as mediações presentes nos processos de sociabilidade podem colaborar nos processos de negociação com as regras e códigos sociais vigentes para inventar outros possíveis. Todos, de certa forma, dão a ver, em seu conjunto, que entramos numa arena onde os diversos elementos que constituem o social interagem e ganham novos contornos: o político não dialoga apenas com o “ideológico”, mas também com o cultural, o subjetivo, o artístico. Da mesma forma, a arte, por exemplo, não diz respeito apenas ao cânone, mas também ao político, ao urbano, ao sensual e ao banal. Com isso, também a noção de tecnologia se amplia e, entendida como “máquina social”, pode ajudar-nos a melhor apreender as dimensões dos fenômenos culturais e de comunicação hoje. Os onze textos reunidos neste número apontam exatamente para o momento singular em que vivemos sob alguns de seus mais diversos ângulos. Stéphane Hugon da Universidade René Decartes-Paris V/CEAQ discute a importância dos processos de apropriação da tecnologia no quotidiano; João Maia e Eduardo Bianchi, da UERJ, abordam a sociabilidade de jovens adolescentes de uma favela carioca como forma criativa de cidadania; Vicenzo Susca, da Universidade René Decartes-Paris V e da Università di Lingue e Comunicazione de Milão, aborda o aspecto subversivo das tecnologias, através de uma perspectiva transpolítica; Beatriz Bretas da UFMG apresenta estudos de caso sobre modos de organização de redes sociais virtuais no Brasil; Fabio Larocca discute como as tecnologias alteram nosso olhar sobre as dinâmicas sócio-espaciais no contexto das cidades; Florian Dauphin faz uma análise do sofware livre na França, país com uma das mais fortes tradições de organização social desse movimento na Europa; José Pinheiro Neves, da Universidade do Minho, recupera a contribuição de Simondon para uma análise da percepção das imagens nas telas dos computadores; Shangsub Choi, do Korea Information Society Development Institute, aborda as mudanças propiciadas pela internet no quotidiano de pessoas e empresas e as possibilidades de contra-poder; a arquiteta e urbanista Julieta Leite aposta na integração das tecnologias digitais aos tecidos da cidade para a construção de novas experiências espaciais coletivas; Maria da Luz Correia analisa a recuperação da comunicação por cartões postais nos dias atuais. Finalmente, Hedi Zamouri faz uma etnografia da Brigada Anti-Pub, movimento contra o abuso da publicidade nos espaços públicos de Paris e José Cláudio Castanheira resenha o último livro de Shetyl Turkle, “História íntima dos objetos”. A Logos 29, edição especial, chega assim aos leitores com uma gama variada de proposições e de lugares de observação, brindando-nos com novas pistas para a análise de questões que compõem a pesquisa atual no campo da comunicação. Desejamos a todos uma boa leitura. Fernando Gonçalves Editor temático desta edição especial da Logos. Professor adjunto da Faculdade de Comunicação Social da Uerj e membro do Grupo de pesquisa Comunicação, Arte e Cidade, do PPGC-Uerj, onde leciona a disciplina “Tecnologias e Formas de Vinculação Social”. Notas 1 Latour, Bruno. Jamais fomos modernos. Rio de Janeiro: Ed. 34, 1994. 2 Deleuze, Gilles. Kafka, por uma literatura menor. Rio de Janeiro: Imago, 1977. 3 Simondon, Gilbert. Du mode d’existence des objets techniques. 4eme Édition. Paris: Aubier, 1989. (shrink)

모리스는 그의 논문 “Descartes’ Natural Light”에서, 지성을 ‘power of conceiving’ 과 ‘power of cognition’((vis cognoscens 혹은 puissance de connaitre)으로 구분하 고, 후자만을 데카르트의 자연의 빛으로 간주한다. 그는 그 근거로 『철학의 원리』 1부 30 항, 정신지도규칙 의 제12규칙 그리고 『성찰』의 제3성찰의 몇몇 문장들을 제시한다. 그 래서 이렇게 규정된 자연의 빛에 의해 인식되는 공통개념의 진리성은 애당초 데카르트적 의심에서 배제되어 있고, 그는 이러한 의미에서 데카르트가 악순환에서 자유로울 것이라 고 주장한다. 나는 데카르트적 악순환에 관한 그의 주장을 긍정한다. 그러나 모리스와는 달리, 나는 제3성찰에서 공통개념(notiones communes)과 (...) 관련된 자연의 빛은 인식력 (vis cognoscendi) 혹은 이해력(vis intelligendi)이 아니라 자연적 충동(impetus naturales)과 짝을 이루는 ‘지적 본능’이며, 데카르트는 이 본능을 제3성찰에서 신의 존재 증명을 시도할 때 공통개념의 진리성의 보증자로 끌어들였다고 믿는다. (shrink)