For Murray Edelman, political realities are largely inaccessible to the public, save by the mediation of symbols generated by elites. Such symbols often create the illusion of political solutions to complex problems—solutions devised by experts, implemented by effective leaders, and undemonstrably successful in their results.

Spécialiste de l’histoire de l’hystérie, de la voyance et du genre, Nicole Edelman propose, avec cet ouvrage, un livre à la croisée de ses différents domaines de spécialités et à la croisée d’autres, plus nouveaux, comme l’histoire de la justice ou des violences sexuelles. Dans l’Impossible consentement, l’historienne entend en effet livrer une analyse – sa version – de l’histoire du procès qui a abouti à la condamnation à 12 ans de perpétuité de Timothée Castellan pour de multiples viols (...) sur... (shrink)

Le discours et son envers Le discours officiel de nos sociétés - celui que diffusent couramment les média - se veut rationnel, à l’image des révolutions technologiques qui bouleversent la planète. Il ne doit pas faire exagérément illusion : un nombre incalculable de personnes cherchent leur vérité ailleurs ; il y a peu, l’émission la plus populaire de la télévision russe était celle d’un voyant ; dans notre France qui se pense sans préjugés, les croyances dans la voyance, voire la (...) sorcellerie... (shrink)

Le discours et son envers Le discours officiel de nos sociétés - celui que diffusent couramment les média - se veut rationnel, à l’image des révolutions technologiques qui bouleversent la planète. Il ne doit pas faire exagérément illusion : un nombre incalculable de personnes cherchent leur vérité ailleurs ; il y a peu, l’émission la plus populaire de la télévision russe était celle d’un voyant ; dans notre France qui se pense sans préjugés, les croyances dans la voyance, voire la (...) sorcellerie... (shrink)

Le discours et son envers Le discours officiel de nos sociétés - celui que diffusent couramment les média - se veut rationnel, à l’image des révolutions technologiques qui bouleversent la planète. Il ne doit pas faire exagérément illusion : un nombre incalculable de personnes cherchent leur vérité ailleurs ; il y a peu, l’émission la plus populaire de la télévision russe était celle d’un voyant ; dans notre France qui se pense sans préjugés, les croyances dans la voyance, voire la (...) sorcellerie... (shrink)

Murray Edelman's work raised significant theoretical and methodological questions regarding the symbolic nature of politics, and specifically the role played by non‐rational beliefs (those that lack real‐world grounding) in the shaping of political preferences. According to Edelman, beneath an apparently functional and accountable democratic state lies a symbolic system that renders an ignorant public quiescent. The state, the media, civil society, interpersonal relations, even popular art are part of a mass spectacle kept afloat by empty symbolic beliefs. However (...) suggestive it is, the weaknesses of Edelman's theoretical and methodological approach, and the relative strengths of more recent research on the politics of cultural symbols, render Edelman's work unable to serve as either model or springboard for the contemporary study of political symbols. (shrink)

Depuis une décennie, le terme genre se banalise dans les travaux historiques en français et son utilisation ne génère plus de longues justifications. Tel est le constat qu’on peut tirer de ce volume collectif réunissant chercheur-e-s et doctorant-e-s lors de l’université européenne d’été « Semaine de Haute formation du Doctorat international en Histoire des femmes et des identités de genre à l’époque moderne et contemporaine » en septembre 2008. La réunion, à l’Université Paris Ouest Nanterre...

Faire l’histoire de l’hystérie est une tâche aussi difficile que celle qui consistait, au xixe siècle, à la cerner médicalement. L’hystérie fait partie de ces pathologies, dotées d’un substrat médical fuyant, complexe, qui, brouillage supplémentaire, ont été adoptées par le langage courant : un des ces « mots baladeurs », comme l’écrit l’auteur, qui supposent une analyse serrée des conditions de leur emploi et une mise en contexte systématique sur la longue durée. L’histoire classique de la...

Deuteronomy-Kings as Emerging Authoritative Books: A Conversation. Edited by Diana V. Edelman. Ancient Near East Monographs, vol. 6. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2014. Pp. xi + 289. $33.95.

제럴드 에델만은 단순히 뇌의 작용만이 아니라 뇌와 몸, 환경의 사이에서 일어나는 광범위한 상호작용을 통해 인식이 이루어지면서 마음이 창발 한다고 주장한다. 의식이란 앎의 기능을 수행하는 신경작용의 ‘과정’일 뿐이므로, 뇌의 인식 과정을 밝히면 자연스럽게 의식의 발생과 마음을 이해할 수 있다는 것이다. 이러한 주장의 바탕에는 신경구조들과 신경구조들로부터 생성되는 의식이 인과적 관계를 가지며, 이러한 인과적 관계를 해명하는 것으로 인식과 심신문제를 충분히 해결할 수 있다는 믿음이 깔려 있다. 본 논문의 목적은 이러한 그의 주장이 정당화될 수 있는지를 비판적으로 고찰하는 것이다. 에델만은 인식을 지각 범주화, 기억, 재유입과 (...) 가치-범주 기억체계의 메커니즘으로 분석한 다음 이를 종합적으로 설명함으로써 의식과 의식의 일원성을 설명한다. 과학적 설명만으로 마음을 해명하는 데에는 많은 한계가 있다. 칸트의 심신 상호작용론은 마음의 문제가 개념적으로 접근해야 할 문제임을 보여준다. 이러한 이유들을 통해 에델만의 주장이 정당화되기에는 역부족임을 입증할 것이다. (shrink)

Over the course of his career, Murray Edelman made one of the few sustained attempts by a theoretically inclined political scientist to explore the effects of the public's overwhelming ignorance of politics. In his early work, he focused on political elites? manipulation of an ignorant public through the deployment of symbolism. In his later work, however, he suggested that even elites are the puppets of their ideologies. His early work has been well received; his later work has gone largely (...) unremarked. The reason may have to do with the very thing that Edelman was, in his later work, addressing: the ideological biases of his politically elite audience. (shrink)

Although there is little empirical doubt of the cerebral base of consciousness, it still has an unapproachable quality about it. Gerald Edelman and Giulio Tononi offer a hypothesis that should give us the tool to start disentangling the 'world knot', an image Arthur Schopenhauer used to describe the problem of the origin of consciousness. Their primary focus is not the richness in everyday experience, but the conditions that allow us that experiential richness -- a difficult enough task, as most (...) would admit reading the book. It shows how the cranial barrier can be overcome by new observation techniques, producing a plethora of experimental data in support of the concepts and theories described in the book. This material leads to the formulation of the dynamic-core hypothesis which describes the necessary biological conditions for consciousness. (shrink)

Two books published within months of each other, each critical of the reigning family of working assumptions known as cognitive science, each calling for a more biological vision of the mind and even sharing a slogan: we must see the mind as "embodied". Is this merely a striking coincidence or perhaps a case of convergent evolution of scientific ideas? There are further striking similarities. Francisco Varela, the principle author of The Embodied Mind, is an immunologist-turned-neuroscientist, and so is Gerald (...) class='Hi'>Edelman, author of Bright Air, Brilliant Fire. Both books call for a biological counter-revolution to succeed the cognitive revolution, but neither are attracted to the even more radically revolutionary "quantum gravity" speculations of Roger Penrose. (shrink)

For many years, most AI researchers and cognitive scientists have reserved the topic of consciousness for after dinner conversation. Like "intuition," the idea of consciousness appeared to be too vague or general to be a good starting place for understanding cognition. Work on narrowly-defined problems in specialized domains such as medicine and manufacturing focused our concerns on the nature of representation, memory, strategies for problem-solving, and learning. Some writers, notably Ornstein and Hofstadter, continued to explore the ideas, but implications for (...) cognitive modeling were unclear, suggesting neither experiments, nor new computational mechanisms. (shrink)

L’ouvrage qui réunit 17 contributions d’une grande richesse couvrant les XIXe et XXe siècles est issu du colloque international « Construire les sciences de l’homme : quels rôles pour les femmes? » qui s’est tenu à Paris en 2001 sous l’égide de l’European Science Foundation. Les directrices du projet ont souhaité avant tout « Poser la question des rôles des femmes dans l’histoire des sciences de l’homme (pour) interroger d’une autre manière le problème d’un accès différencié au savoir et à (...) s... (shrink)

The article deals with the following: Three brain imaging studies on athletes are evaluated. What do these neuroscientific studies tell us about the brain and mind of the athlete? Empirical investigations will need a neuro-theory of mind if they are to make the leap from neural activity to the mental. The article looks at such a theory, Gerald Edelman's?Neural Darwinism?. What are the implications of such a theory for sport science and philosophy of sport? The article appreciates some of (...) the neurosciences applications, but questions the hope of giving a complete theory of mind. (shrink)

The emphasis placed by H. Atlan, like G. Bateson, on the reception of messages during communication between subsystems leads to a conception of learning, and more generally of human memory, surprisingly close to that proposed by I. Rosenfield on the basis of the work of G. M. Edelman. The authors stressed the close and reciprocal link between the theory of functional localization and the conception of memory, which they have just seen, radically refuted by Rosenfield. The theory of functional (...) localization therefore considers as established the existence of a whole series of rigid relationships between specific locations in the brain and certain major functions performed by the body. Thus briefly summarized, the theory of neural Darwinism provides positive evidence in favor of the Rosenfield's theory of human memory. All these characteristics make the functioning of human memory an outstanding example of the natural complexity of a self‐organized system in the sense of Atlan. (shrink)

This study of Ralph Pred’s Onflow (MIT Press, 2005) expands on Pred’s arguments and raises doubts about the viability of phenomenology. Showing that Pred’s method is indeed phenomenological, I validate his interpretations of William James as phenomenologist and his critique of John Searle in light of James, which documents the extent to which the role of habit in the constitution of experience is neglected by philosophers. In explaining habit, however, Pred himself reverts to non-phenomenological models drawn from James’ postulate of (...) psycho-physical parallelism. Habit, like causation, poses an unmet challenge to phenomenological methods. In his critique of Gerald Edelman, Pred notes that Edelman falls prey to a metaphysical bias inherent in modern Indo-European languages. But Pred’s acuity in exposing a latent linguistic bias in phenomenological data is a two-edged sword. Revealing an invisible dependence of appearance on language, it casts doubt on the project of getting beyond language to "appearances-in-themselves.". (shrink)

There are clear parallels between Žižek's concept of apocalyptic experience without teleology, and Berlant and Edelman's "sex without optimism." Both readings point to a negativity at the heart of human experience and the need to reliquish all our teleological aspirations. The apocalpytic experience should be taken in its original sense, as a "revelation," but a revelation of the incoherence of the social order and its demands on the Subject. This non-telelogical experience can be illustrated by contrasting the works of (...) Homer with Virgil's Aeneid. In the Homeric world the incoherence of the social order, represented by the incoherent and conflicting demands of the gods is in sharp contrast to the teleological order displayed in The Aeneid. (shrink)

Edelman's memory-based approach to visual representation is preferable to parts-based alternatives. However, the existing algorithms for learning the shape prototypes are biologically implausible because they are nonlocal and nonconstructive. There is an alternative learning algorithm that constructs a mixture model of prototypes on-line, using only local information, and is more biologically plausible and may perform sufficiently well.

JOHN SEARLE is clear, challenging and profound, and his book The Mystery of Consciousness reflects its author. It offers an engaging debate between Searle and David Chalmers, Daniel Dennett, Roger Penrose and Israel Rosenfield. Searle also touches on the work of Gerald Edelman and Francis Crick. Yet Searle does not always hit the target. For example, he confuses giving an explanation with giving an ultimate explanation in criticising Edelman's reentry mapping.

Edelman's target article purports to be about veridical representations. I argue that it would be a mistake to think it has much to do with veridicality as normally understood.

Lee Edelman's controversial book No Future: Queer Theory and the Death Drive represents the most recent articulation of the so-called “antisocial thesis” in queer theory. This thesis–which emerges...

Edelman suggests that any shape is encoded by an excitation vector with components corresponding to excitations of corresponding neuronal modules. This results in discrimination of stimuli in a shape space of low dimensionality. Similar vector encoding is present in color vision. Red-green, blue-yellow, bright and dark neurons are modules that represent a number of different color stimuli in color space of low dimensionality. Vector encoding allows effective computation of color differences and color similarities. Such a neuronal vector-encoding approach has (...) also been applied to the perception of visual movement, line orientation, and stereopsis. (shrink)

It has long been one of the most fundamental problems of philosophy, and it is now, John Searle writes, "the most important problem in the biological sciences": What is consciousness? Is my inner awareness of myself something separate from my body? In what began as a series of essays in The New York Review of Books, John Searle evaluates the positions on consciousness of such well-known scientists and philosophers as Francis Crick, Gerald Edelman, Roger Penrose, Daniel Dennett, David Chalmers, (...) and Israel Rosenfield. He challenges claims that the mind works like a computer, and that brain functions can be reproduced by computer programs. With a sharp eye for confusion and contradiction, he points out which avenues of current research are most likely to come up with a biological examination of how conscious states are caused by the brain. Only when we understand how the brain works will we solve the mystery of consciousness, and only then will we begin to understand issues ranging from artificial intelligence to our very nature as human beings. (shrink)

Critiques G. Edelman's Theory of Neuronal Group Selection , from the perspectives of social constructionism, contemporary theory of metaphor, and existential-phenomenological psychology. This theory provides a contemporary biological view of consciousness and the self. Edelman's notion of consciousness as purely biological, and his attempt to ground intentionality in the body, are reductionistic. It is suggested that phenomenological descriptions must be taken into the center of the problem of consciousness. An understanding of the relation of the experiential basis of (...) metaphor and its ensuing ontological status, can offer a view of the influence of particular biological metaphors which could help to eliminate their reification in psychology and induce their critique. 2012 APA, all rights reserved). (shrink)

Hayek's substantial contribution to theoretical psychology has been addressed in the work of Thomas Szasz, Gerald Edelman, and Joaquin Fuster.

We usually consider literary thinking to be peripheral and dispensable, an activity for specialists: poets, prophets, lunatics, and babysitters. Certainly we do not think it is the basis of the mind. We think of stories and parables from Aesop's Fables or The Thousand and One Nights, for example, as exotic tales set in strange lands, with spectacular images, talking animals, and fantastic plots--wonderful entertainments, often insightful, but well removed from logic and science, and entirely foreign to the world of everyday (...) thought. But Mark Turner argues that this common wisdom is wrong. The literary mind--the mind of stories and parables--is not peripheral but basic to thought. Story is the central principle of our experience and knowledge. Parable--the projection of story to give meaning to new encounters--is the indispensable tool of everyday reason. Literary thought makes everyday thought possible. This book makes the revolutionary claim that the basic issue for cognitive science is the nature of literary thinking. In The Literary Mind, Turner ranges from the tools of modern linguistics, to the recent work of neuroscientists such as Antonio Damasio and Gerald Edelman, to literary masterpieces by Homer, Dante, Shakespeare, and Proust, as he explains how story and projection--and their powerful combination in parable--are fundamental to everyday thought. In simple and traditional English, he reveals how we use parable to understand space and time, to grasp what it means to be located in space and time, and to conceive of ourselves, other selves, other lives, and other viewpoints. He explains the role of parable in reasoning, in categorizing, and in solving problems. He develops a powerful model of conceptual construction and, in a far-reaching final chapter, extends it to a new conception of the origin of language that contradicts proposals by such thinkers as Noam Chomsky and Steven Pinker. Turner argues that story, projection, and parable precede grammar, that language follows from these mental capacities as a consequence. Language, he concludes, is the child of the literary mind. Offering major revisions to our understanding of thought, conceptual activity, and the origin and nature of language, The Literary Mind presents a unified theory of central problems in cognitive science, linguistics, neuroscience, psychology, and philosophy. It gives new and unexpected answers to classic questions about knowledge, creativity, understanding, reason, and invention. (shrink)