In spite of his clear and deliberate distinction between philosophical and religious discourse, Ricoeur lets these two aspects of his thought interweave with respect to the deep "conviction" motiving it. The idea of “attestation”, considered as the "password" granting access to his last "hermeneutics of the self", testifies to this in particular. This term, while containing a religious connotation, refers to what Heidegger calls Fundamentalontologie , in which attestation ( Bezeugung ) is totally de-theologized to indicate how Dasein assumes its (...) own death. But Ricoeur only incorporates this notion into his thought by making it undergo a profound modification. Ricoeur replaces “being–toward–death” with “remaining alive until…”, which allows him to recognize “the religious in common.” How can we develop a conception of the philosophy of religion from this winding process? This article marks a first step toward answering that question. (shrink)

The French Introduction to a special issue on Ricoeur and Theology.

Witnessing after the “end of philosophy,” in the sense in which Heidegger mentions it in his famous lecture on “The end of philosophy and the task of thinking”—what does this mean for us and our world today? As a preparation for an answer to this question, the present study proposes to elaborate a radical hermeneutics of testimony, by invoking French philosophers who can be qualified as “post-Heideggerian”—Lévinas, Ricoeur, Derrida, among others—whose thoughts on testimony were developed through the essential critique on (...) Heideggerian idea of attestation and the creative reactivation of the semantic resources historically preserved by terms such as “witness” and “testimony”. (shrink)

This book aims to revise the traditional interpretation of William Golding's fiction.

経済の発展期には美徳とされた勤勉の価値が豊かさの到来とともに揺らいでいる。よく働くことは余暇や家庭や地域の生活と相反する生き方になってしまった。勤勉な労働よりも、意味ある労働が求められるようになる。だ が、勤勉倫理に代わる新しい仕事倫理は生まれるのだろうか。仕事をめぐる過去の思索を訪ね歩き、「良い仕事」の思想の伝統の中に、現代の自己実現願望の限界を超える新しい仕事倫理・仕事理念の可能性を見出す。.

Dans 'les Deux sources de la morale et de la religion', Bergson évoque rarement le Japon. Et pourtant dans le quatrième chapitre du même texte, intitulé Remarques finales 'Mécanique et mystique', c'était lui qui a bien prévu Hiroshima avec ces mots testamentaires: ' Il faut que tous se battent contre tous, comme firent les hordes des premiers temps. Seulement on se bat avec les armes forgées par notre civilisation, et les massacres sont d'une horreur que les anciens n'auraient même pas (...) imaginée. Au train dont va la science, le jour approche où l'un des adversaires, possesseur d'un secret qu'il tenait en réserve, aura le moyen de supprimer l'autre'. Ainsi se pose la question de savoir comment envisager les Deux Sources, à travers les relations assez particulières de ce philosophe avec le Japon. À partir de cette interrogation, PBJ (Projet Bergson au Japon) a organisé, aux 5-8 novembre 2013, à Paris, un colloque qui s'intitule Remarques finales : autour des Deux sources de la morale et de la religion de Bergson. Le présent volume présente les actes de ce colloque ellipsoïdal dont les centres étaient Bergson et le Japon"--Back cover. (shrink)

L’acte de la philosophie japonaise est celui d’un évidement de soi: acte d’accueil des traditions philosophiques du monde, acte en résonance, créateur d’une terminologie, d’une logique, d’une conceptualité originales, s’alimentant aux sources d’une pensée mythique jamais tarie. Les textes présentés ici en feront sentir l’inclassable nouveauté: cette philosophie n’est ni purement shintoïste, bouddhique, chrétienne, néoconfucianiste ; elle n’est ni « orientale » ni « occidentale », mais proprement japonaise.

Yasuhiko Sugimura’s review of my book La Religion dans la philosophie (Hermann, 2021) for the present issue of Études Ricœuriennes / Ricoeur Studies affords me an opportunity to return to my intention in this work. I verify the heuristic hypothesis that the complex relationship that Ricoeur’s philosophy established with religion can be explained by a process of secularization [laïcisation] of Ricoeur’s religious convictions. In dialogue with the aforementioned review, I propose to reconsider certain aspects of my criticism of Ricoeur (...) on the question of truth. (shrink)

Anfractuosité et unification consiste en une introduction à la pensée de Nishida Kitarô (1870-1945), au moyen du fil directeur interprétatif qu’est la notion d’« unification » (tôitsusuru). Que signifie unifier : atteindre une unité dernière, ou bien poursuivre « sans cesse » l’unité ? Une telle poursuite ne revient-t-elle pas à un « néant pur et simple » ? En fait, cette crainte ne proviendrait-elle pas de ce que l’homme ne peut faire face à l’« infini » qui se trouve (...) derrière l’être même ? Dès lors, à quel « lieu » correspondrait un tel « au-delà » ? La finitude serait-elle la limite du « soi », la notion d’être est-elle l’unique clé de l’histoire de la réalité ? Un « néant absolu » a-t-il encore quelque chose à voir avec l’être ? Michel Dalissier examine les réponses de Nishida à la faveur de trois explorations de ses oeuvres majeures, en insistant sur sa relation intellectuelle avec la philosophie occidentale, ainsi que sur les « annotations manuscrites » qu’il laissait dans ses livres. (shrink)

The late John Burrow, one of the most stimulating promoters of the distinctively interdisciplinary enterprise that is Intellectual History, was a vital member of what has become known as the ‘Sussex School’. In exploring the resonances of his singular and richly idiosyncratic contribution, this article places his unique historical sensibility within a series of interpretative contexts, demonstrating the vitality of writings that will continue to inspire and inform scholarship in the field for decades to come. ☆ The Sussex Centre for (...) Intellectual History Lecture delivered at the University of Sussex on 21st October, 2010. I am deeply indebted to Noël Sugimura for reading and commenting on an earlier version of the present essay with her customary sense and sensibility. (shrink)

The study of historiography is undergoing a revolution akin to that which took place in the history of political thought in the 1960s, and the work of J.G.A. Pocock is central to both. Pocock's continuing exploration, in Barbarism and Religion (1999-), of the intellectual contexts of Gibbon's History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, is central to this enterprise, and this essay situates the origins of his own work within a pre-‘Cambridge School’ Cambridge and its experience of (...) what might be called the Butterfieldian moment. That was marked by a desire to treat religion seriously as a driving force in history; and the same concern is applied here to further understanding an eighteenth-century controversy in which history and religion were dramatically involved, and which profoundly affected Gibbon's own historical and religious views. The work of Conyers Middleton and John Jortin is critically examined from this perspective. These preludes to Gibbon lead to a series of postludes examining the particular contexts in which Victorian and twentieth-century historians and writers, from Henry Hart Milman to Evelyn Waugh, variously appreciated and interpreted Gibbon. The whole is to be seen as a reflexive engagement with Pocock's vitally illuminating studies in eighteenth-century historiography. ☆ A slightly revised version of a lecture given at the University of Sussex on 22nd May 2008, on the occasion of a colloquium devoted to J.G.A. Pocock's Barbarism and Religion. It had originally acted as a prelude to a lecture by Pocock on the same occasion, subsequently published as ‘Gibbon and the invention of Gibbon: chapters 15 and 16 reconsidered’, History of European Ideas 35 (2009), 209–16. In this sense, therefore, the present essay has become a postlude. I am deeply grateful to Noël Sugimura for generously reading and commenting on the rescoring of a lecture into an essay. (shrink)