Although there are some common underlying mechanisms for many nonhuman behavioural asymmetries, the evidence at present is not compelling for commonalities in cerebral organisation across vertebrates. Phylogenetic analysis of detour behaviour in fish suggests that more closely related species are not particularly similar in the direction of turning; contingency and demands of ecological niches may better explain such asymmetries.

Following some of the main arguments Derrida develops in ‘White Mythology’, in this article I propose an unexplored dialogue between Derrida and Althusser considering the use and the place that each of them gives to metaphor in their philosophical strategies. I give special attention to some rather isolated passages of ‘Elements of Self-Criticism’ and ‘Lenin and Philosophy’, where Althusser, against all evidence, seems to be quite aware of the importance of metaphor and mataphorization in every philosophical practice. As Balibar has (...) argued, contrary to the metaphysical tradition, metaphor would not be the opposite but what anticipates the concept. In this sense, it is possible to observe how Althusser’s work has continuously put into practice – as the singular signature of his theoretical practice – something that I call the ‘detour of metaphor’ as a necessary ‘deviation’ for the production of new concepts. Without any evidence that Althusser may have known Derrida’s essay, I show how Althusser’s own theoretical work, one in which ‘metaphor’ as a philosophical theme appears to be rather anecdotic, is unexpectedly close to Derrida’s own positions concerning the margins of philosophy and its ‘outside’, the relation to the metaphysical tradition, and the importance of strategy in philosophy. (shrink)

The framing problematic of this dissertation is the political and epistemological relationship between metropolitan theory and post-colonial narrative. By providing multiple determinations to that problematic, I seek to situate the inventions of post-colonial identity. Using "detour" both as a privileged figure of contemporary theory and as the lived socio-historical experience of post-colonials, I examine the theoretical and political consequences using the former to translate the latter. Placing my own discourse at the limits of theory, I show that the predicament (...) in which contemporary theory finds itself is a result of the reduction of narrative to theory . ;I stage the negotiation between metropolitan theory and post-colonial narratives as an allegory of the post-colonial predicament. Finally, through a critique of certain post-colonial theorists , I plot the limits of the post-colonial space in the First World. I conclude that to invent the post-colonial space as a signifying space, we need to develop a poetics of retour which will be as complex and as ambiguous as the poetics of detour that the post-colonials have been living, narrating, and theorizing. ;Chapter I sets the theoretical context for posing the problem of post-colonial self-fashioning. In Chapter II, I sketch the trajectory of post-colonial detour through a close reading of V. S. Naipaul's The Mimic Men. In Chapter III, I interrogate Homi Bhabha's theory of cultural hybridity as a version of the poetics of detour. In Chapter IV, I offer a characterization of the predicament of theory. In the final chapter, I discuss the uses of theory by post-colonial intellectuals and offer a critique of their politics of cultural description and self-description. I argue that post-colonial theorists have evaded the question of inventing the post-colonial space as a signifying space by rewriting the narrative of their detour as a narrative of diplacement, as immigritude. (shrink)

This article responds to Roland Boer’s Marxism and Theology that offers a unique contribution to understanding the current impasse in revolutionary Left politics and illustrates the importance of the numerous references to theology in Marxist literature. In this response, I focus on Boer's argument of Marxism and Judaeo-Christian theology occupying a similar contested space with respect to their uses of “political myth.” I argue that the key to Boer’s critical project is a two-pronged approach: “materializing” theology and “theologizing” historical materialism. (...) For this critical endeavor to make inroads, it relies not just on the ambivalence of political myth, but also that myths are essential to Marxist theories of emancipation, as well as to Marx’s notion of “the Aufhebung of Religion.” I focus on two figures: Ernst Bloch as a Marxist who emphasizes myth’s emancipatory qualities; and Theodor Adorno as wary of myth while adhering to the theological motif of the bilderverbot. From this analysis, we can begin to see how much Boer’s project depends on a wager on political myth itself. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Art's DetourA Clash of Aesthetic TheoriesS. K. Wertz (bio)Both John Dewey1 and Martin Heidegger2 thought that art's audience had to take a detour in order to appreciate or understand a work of art. They wrote about this around the same time (mid-1930s) and independently of one another, so this similar circumstance in the history of aesthetics is unusual since they come from very different philosophical traditions. What was (...) it about the climate of the times that led them to such an idea? Is it still viable today? Both philosophers thought that art's audience is not in a position to immediately appreciate works of art—that we are missing something for a direct appreciation or apprehension—so we must take a detour. Why the detours and what are they? Are the detours similar? And are Dewey and Heidegger right about this? The essay that unfolds below attempts to answer these questions.First a definition is in order so we know what the term "detour" means when I use it. What is a detour? It is a deviation from a direct course or the usual procedure; a roundabout way temporarily replacing part of a route; in other words, a bypass or a roundabout way to some destination. The Little Oxford Dictionary adds a different twist on my characterization: "a course that leaves and rejoins [the] direct route."3 Applying this idea to art, we can say that a detour describes an audience who ordinarily perceives an artwork is a legitimate beginning for an appreciation of it, but that course must be bypassed for another (conception) before it can rejoin the direct route (perception). In other words, perceptions in the aesthetic experience must be aided by conceptions—a decidedly Kantian stance taken by Dewey and Heidegger. Their illustrations make my interpretation plausible.One of Heidegger's examples is Van Gogh's painting of a pair of peasant boots.4 He selects this painting to illustrate his metaphysics, which centers around the notion of "equipment." Peasant boots are equipment in [End Page 100] the sense that they are worn or used; the mere thing (like shoes or boots in a store [exhibited] or a closet [in storage]) disappears in use and becomes equipment. Between equipment and mere things—these two categories of being—are artworks. They are pictorial representations of equipment (in Heidegger's illustration; a pair of shoes as mere things could be a pictorial representation, like an advertisement, but it wouldn't be the same). Through the painted boots, a world comes into focus—a network of meaning. The world Heidegger sees in the Van Gogh painting is captured in the following descriptions: "In the vicinity of the [art]work we were suddenly somewhere else than we usually tend to be…. The art work let us know what shoes are in truth" (ATCR 233). So the nature of art is still a question about the nature of representation for Heidegger: it is what the shoes disclose to us about human existence. As he says, it is not just merely a pair of shoes portrayed but shoes "from the dark opening of the worn insides … the toilsome tread of the worker stares forth" (ATCR 232). In other words, we see the difficult labor that this particular owner toiled with in her daily chores.In Tralbaut's book, he quotes Heidegger in a caption alongside the painting: "Engraving in the intimate obscurity of the hollow of a boot is the weariness of the steps of work. The rough and solid weight of the clog tells of the slow and obstinate trudge across the fields."5 Heidegger continues in the same vein:In the stiffly rugged heaviness of the shoes there is the accumulated tenacity of her slow trudge through the far-spreading and ever-uniform furrows of the field swept by a raw wind. On the leather lie the dampness and richness of the soil. Under the soles slides the loneliness of the field-path as evening falls. In the shoes vibrates the silent call of the earth, its quiet gift of the ripening grain and its unexplained self-refusal in the fallow desolation of... (shrink)

This paper is concerned with the deployment and the transformation of Gramsci’s notion of hegemony and the purpose it serves. I argue that, in its travel from Rome to London, this notion acquired something like a truth-value. In London the notion yielded what I call ‘hegemony thinking’: a distinctive style of thinking that focused on strategy to carry out effective political interventions. To demonstrate my claim I trace the Marxism Today discussion on the crisis of the Left and strategy in (...) the UK. In particular, I look at the engagements of the late historian Eric Hobsbawm and the cultural theorist Stuart Hall with Gramsci’s work, and examine the appropriation of the coordinates of hegemony by the entrepreneur and Blair policy advisor Geoff Mulgan. (shrink)

I would describe myself as an accidental humanist, if not atheist. That was very much how I felt when I found myself on June 4, 2010, standing at the podium of the sixty-ninth annual conference of the American Humanist Association. I was receiving the Humanist Pioneer Award. But what did I do to deserve the honor? The golden letters on the beautifully crafted award said: “To Wendy Liu for her pioneering work that advances Humanist values and critical thought through cross (...) cultural perspectives on American Society.” The “pioneering work” presumably meant my writings on US-China relatedtopics, especially the collection of essays on my understanding of America from a Chinese and non-religious angle. As an aspiring writer, I was happy to be recognized for anything, not to say that particular angle. But that angle, with which I stumbled my way to the San Jose conference, was not an accident. It had come a long way with me on a journey starting in Xian, China, my hometown. Talking about Xian, the terracotta warriors of Qin Shihuang, the first Emperor of China, would probably come to one’s mind. Visitors have marveled at the work of ancient artisans, especially the rendering of individual facial features of the clay soldiers in eternity. In contrast to that humanistic touch was the cruelty of Emperor Qin, who ordered that upon his death the entrance to the underground mausoleum be sealed on completion, entombing the laborers inside to keep it secret.1 This is a brief but telling picture of humanism vs. tyranny in China–the once-upon-a time China. (shrink)

In Seminar XVII, entitled The reverse side of psychoanalysis, Jacques Lacan presents his famous theorem of the four discourses. In this rereading I propose to demonstrate that Lacan’s theorem entails a transferable dialectical method for studying processes of knowledge production, enabling contemporary scholars to develop a diagnostic of the present, notably scholars interested in issues such as the vicissitudes of knowledge production under capitalism, the crisis of the university and the proliferation of electronic gadgets. In short, I will argue that (...) Lacan’s theorem of the four discourses entails a dialectical diagnostic of technoscientific knowledge during late capitalism. First, the four discourses will be briefly outlined, emphasising the extent to which they entail, albeit in an ambivalent manner, a return or detour to the logic of Hegel. Subsequently, each discourse will be presented in more detail, emphasising how they allow us to come to terms with the current status of technoscientific knowledge. Special attention will be given to the political backdrop of the seminar: the crisis of the university. Finally, I will discuss the historical dimension, outlining both the predecessor of the four discourses and their current predicament under neoliberal/capitalist conditions. (shrink)

Jacques Lacan was a notoriously difficult and idiosyncratic thinker. But is there any value in his hermetically difficult style? By highlighting certain crucial elements of his practice, I show how Lacan enlists the notion of difficulty to press home that he did not want his readers to understand directly. Instead, as Foucault and Althusser explain so well, Lacan wished for his readers and auditors to discover themselves as subjects of desire through reading him. Indeed, in miming the language of the (...) unconscious, Lacan believed he could throw into sharp relief the notion of the unconscious itself and, paradoxically, better express himself. This temporary detour through misunderstanding indicates the programmatic value of difficulty itself. By commenting on the comedic aspect of Lacan's difficult literary dandyism, I also seek to playfully remind the reader that Lacan was a master of comedy and irony and that it is only by adopting a comparative literary approach to his work that we can appreciate how his theory of misunderstanding is at the heart of his conceptualization of madness and psychosis, allowing us to see how, for Lacan, the subject is ontologically sick. (shrink)

[opening paragraph]: Reading the article by Naudin et al. on Husserlian reduction in psychiatry prompted me to review a few chapters of my intellectual autobiography. I entered graduate school enamoured with Husserl, believing him a potent and necessary antidote to the hubris of the ‘natural attitude’ expounded by natural science. But I left graduate school believing that Husserl was too wrapped up in the debate as to whether reality was objective or subjective. Hence I ask in response to Naudin et (...) al.: must we take on Husserl's Cartesian baggage only to shed it as we move from trascendental subjectivity to the life world to narrative? The Husserlian apparatus seems a needlessly complicated and convoluted tool for exploring the essentially social deficit of the schizophrenic. Perhaps the most valuable contribution of phenomenology to psychiatry is its assiduous cultivation of ‘beginner's mind’ as it is often spoken of in Zen practice. (shrink)

Cet ouvrage rassemble une serie d'articles parus en francais dans les Archives de philosophic entre 1974 et 1987. Passons rapidement sur le fait que la collection «Vrin-Reprise» se donne pour but de remettre a la disposition de tous des textes ou des etudes «aujourd'hui introuvables ou inaccessibles». Ouvert par un texte de 1981 ou I'auteur nous livre son autobiographic intellectuelle, l'ouvrage reprend ensuite l'article «Philosophie de la recherche scientifique» (1974) qui expose les vues de Radnitzky sur une theorie praxiologique de (...) la recherche. Reconstruction ratjonnelle de la recherche scientifique comme systeme d'action, cette theorie developpe des modeles de facteurs qui brientent la-recherche ainsi que des modeles de coagence des recherches theoriques et empiriques. Bien que la theorie se concentre sur les processus de production, elle comprend egalement un systeme de types de criteres qui permettent de juger les produits de la recherche scientifique. Con§ue comme voie mediane par rapport aux reconstructions logiques et aux etudes empiriques de la science, la praxiologie envisagee par Radnitzky («"Praxiologie" est employe ici au sens de Kotarbinski; en gros, c'est la theorie de Faction effective et efficace» [p. 99]) se reclame d'une theorie de l'action dirigee rationnellement vers un but (Zweckrationalitat) qui deboucherait ultimement sur une «anthropologie philosophique de la connaissance» (p. 31). Quoi qu'il en soit, Radnitzky manifeste le desir de se situer a la confluence des traditions analytique et hermeneutique; mais, en fait, malgre un apanage de concepts systemiques qui lui est particulier, son entreprise demeure largement tributaire de la theorie critique de Popper, comme l'atteste la teneur des autres articles qui composent cet ouvrage et qui portent tous, a une exception pres, sur la methodologie popperienne des sciences. L'exception est un article recent qui propose d'emprunter a l'economie l'analyse cout-benefice pour tirer au clair les questions de choix intertheorique («preference rationnelle») en science. Pour le reste, Radnitzky nous presente une defense parfois servile de la methodologie popperienne, tout en tentant de l'affermir par sa propre contribution d'une dimension qui lui manque, la dimension praxiologique justement. (shrink)

This article claims that an ‘enclosure of the commons’ is underway, which reaches far beyond intellectual property, to a point where, through profiling, ‘identity’ has itself become enclosed property that can be owned by another. With a detour through the natures of both money and innovation, this paper looks at the imperative driving ‘intellectual property rights.’ By introducing the notion of biopiracy, it shows how ‘invasion of privacy’ is justified, and ends with “a world of rapacious, state-aided ‘privatization’” of (...) enclosed identity: the ultimate identity theft. (shrink)

The purpose of this article is to propose a synthesis of Jacques Poulain's philosophical reflection on language and its importance for human being and for the society. To do this, we begin with presenting what Poulain has constantly established in the light of anthropobiological knowledge in his various works by showing that the child does not directly enter the world through senses or action, but through language and that it cannot enter the world and become a subject able to think (...) and act in isolation, but necessarily through the intermediary of a Third of speech. The same goes for the author at the institutional level, since man, as a being of language, has only been able to transform himself indirectly, through the intermediary of this Third of speech, which first took the form of the gods, then by making the detour of the judgment. Today, as Poulain argues in polemic with Jürgen Habermas, there can be no other basis for global communication than transcultural linguistic understanding, ie. language constitutes the space where man can be recognized, exercise judgment and strive for harmony with others. (shrink)

Both as regards their compass (non-other-addressed speech and non-informative communication are in effect ignored) and their scarcely empirical nature, there is reason to be dissatisfied with recent developments in Pragmatics. How to find a sounder basis for pragmatic investigation? If a psychological (in this sense: centered on underlying mental processes) appproach is adopted in Pragmatics investigation, a strategic detour through mental processes leading to other kinds of activities is likely to prove methodologically sound and heuristically fruitful. For it allows (...) outlining an abstract model of (mental processes) inception of any kind of activity, keeping so at bay theoretical bias from the particular pragmatic standpoint that the theorist may happen to favor. And filling in the model with the specific features of language use shows promise to provide more specific models of the psychological processes underlying performance of linguistic activities. (shrink)

Both as regards their compass (non-other-addressed speech and non-informative communication are in effect ignored) and their scarcely empirical nature, there is reason to be dissatisfied with recent developments in Pragmatics. How to find a sounder basis for pragmatic investigation? If a psychological (in this sense: centered on underlying mental processes) appproach is adopted in Pragmatics investigation, a strategic detour through mental processes leading to other kinds of activities is likely to prove methodologically sound and heuristically fruitful. For it allows (...) outlining an abstract model of (mental processes) inception of any kind of activity, keeping so at bay theoretical bias from the particular pragmatic standpoint that the theorist may happen to favor. And filling in the model with the specific features of language use shows promise to provide more specific models of the psychological processes underlying performance of linguistic activities. (shrink)

Both as regards their compass (non-other-addressed speech and non-informative communication are in effect ignored) and their scarcely empirical nature, there is reason to be dissatisfied with recent developments in Pragmatics. How to find a sounder basis for pragmatic investigation? If a psychological (in this sense: centered on underlying mental processes) appproach is adopted in Pragmatics investigation, a strategic detour through mental processes leading to other kinds of activities is likely to prove methodologically sound and heuristically fruitful. For it allows (...) outlining an abstract model of (mental processes) inception of any kind of activity, keeping so at bay theoretical bias from the particular pragmatic standpoint that the theorist may happen to favor. And filling in the model with the specific features of language use shows promise to provide more specific models of the psychological processes underlying performance of linguistic activities. (shrink)

Both as regards their compass and their scarcely empirical nature, there is reason to be dissatisfied with recent developments in Pragmatics. How to find a sounder basis for pragmatic investigation? If a psychological appproach is adopted in Pragmatics investigation, a strategic detour through mental processes leading to other kinds of activities is likely to prove methodologically sound and heuristically fruitful. For it allows outlining an abstract model of inception of any kind of activity, keeping so at bay theoretical bias (...) from the particular pragmatic standpoint that the theorist may happen to favor. And filling in the model with the specific features of language use shows promise to provide more specific models of the psychological processes underlying performance of linguistic activities. (shrink)

I defend an interpretation of the first Critique’s category of totality based on Kant’s analysis of totality in the third Critique’s Analytic of the mathematical sublime. I show, firstly, that in the latter Kant delineates the category of totality — however general it may be — in relation to the essentially singular standpoint of the subject. Despite the fact that sublime and categorial totality have a significantly different scope and function, they do share such a singular baseline. Secondly, I argue (...) that Kant’s note (in the first Critique’s metaphysical deduction) that deriving the category of totality requires a special act of the understanding can be seen as a ‘mark’ of that singular baseline. This way, my aesthetical ‘detour’ has the potential of revealing how the subjective aspects of object-constitution might be accounted for in the very system of the categories (of quantity) itself. (shrink)

I begin by reviewing classical semantics and the problems presented by normative conflicts. After a brief detour through default logic, I establish some connections between the treatment of conflicts in each of these two approaches, classical and default, and then move on to consider some further issues: priorities among norms, or reasons, conditional oughts, and reasons about reasons.

이 논문을 통해 우리는 리쾨르 철학에서 프로이트의 현존(présence)을 확인하고 이것이 리쾨르 철학의 중요한 국면들에서 어떤 영향을 끼쳐 왔는지를 찾아보고 확인하는 작업을 하려고 한다. 리쾨르 철학의 관점에서 보면 프로이트 담론은 ‘현상학의 해석학적 변형’이고자 하는 리쾨르 자신의 마지막 철학적 단계에서 결정적 역할을 하는 방향타라고 볼 수 있다. 리쾨르를 현대 해석학을 대표하는 인물로 자리매김하는 데 핵심적인 내용을 제공해준 담론 역시 프로이트의 담론일 것이다. 물론 여전히 기술현상학의 틀과 한계 내에서 움직이고 있는 『의지의 철학 I』과 『해석에 대하여: 프로이트에 관한 시론』 사이의 결정적 차이는 “반성”이 일종의 (...) 해석학이어야 한다고 주장함으로써 “반성에 철저히 연계된 해석학적 방법”을 가져오는 데 있어 그가 프로이트 담론에 의존하고 기대었다는 것이다. 욕망의 선재성, 사유에 대한 ‘sum’의 선재성을 프로이트 담론이 설득력 있게 드러내는 이상, 반성은 그런 (욕망하는) 삶의 기호들을 해석하는 프로이트 담론을 만나지 않고 피해 가는 방법은 없었다. 리쾨르에게 프로이트는 필연적인 우회(détour)의 길이었다. 현상학적 철학의 한계와 근대적 반성철학의 전통에 새로운 전기를 마련하는 데 프로이트 담론의 독창적인 기여를 인정하는 차원이라고 보는 게 정확할 것이다. 리쾨르 철학의 긴 여정 속에서 1950년 전후에 프로이트 담론은 (기술현상학이라는) 제한된 관점과 전망 속에서 처음으로 도입되고, 1965년을 전후하여 확장되며 변형된 (해석학적) 대면과 도전의 차원에서 논의되며, 1990년 전후해 2008년까지는 이전의 도입과 대면의 지점을 넘어 충분히 성숙하여 침윤되어 그의 철학 안에 내면화되는 지점에 도달하게 되었다. (shrink)

In what follows, I will provide some elements for constructing Mariátegui’s plural spatiotemporal conception of history. I will do so by focusing on the two books he published in his lifetime: The contemporary scene and Seven Interpretive Essays on Peruvian Reality. In a footnote in the Seven Essays, the reader encounters a concept that opens up the problem of plural temporality in Latin American Marxism: relativismo histórico (historical relativism). This will be the keystone concept upon which certain fragments of Mariátegui’s (...) writings will be put together to construct the concept of plural temporality. This involves taking a detour through what Mariátegui understood by relativismo (relativism). In that detour, we find that Mariátegui’s use of relativismo consists in translating and assimilating the insights of one of the pillars of contemporary physics: Einstein’s theory of relativity. For Mariátegui, the relativistic theory of spacetime undermined the old “absolutes” of the positivist unilinear philosophy of history. I then argue that Mariátegui, through his friend and comrade Hugo Pesce, assimilates and translates the “revolutionary” theory of spacetime as a weapon against the unilinear philosophy of history and as a resource to construct a concept of plural spatiotemporal concept of history. Re-situating Mariátegui’s work along this axis puts some pressure on certain Bergsonian and Sorelian readings that overemphasize the importance of Myth and Humanity as a “metaphysical animal” and thereby tend to underemphasize or outright suppress his creative assimilation and translation of the sciences of his time. (shrink)

In this paper I comment on the arguments put forth by Robert Rosenberger and Galit Wellner on the issue of using a mobile phone while driving a car, and I do this by way of a detour through the work of Kevin Kelly and Marshall McLuhan. While Rosenberger and Wellner focus first and foremost on the possibilities and impossibilities within the human organism, I seek to add to the debate the however experimental standpoint of the technologies “themselves.”.

In the first chapter I have introduced Carnapian intensional logic against the background of Frege's and Quine's puzzles. The main body of the dissertation consists of two parts. In the first part I discussed Carnapian modal logic and arithmetic with descriptions. In the second chapter, I have described three Carnapian theories, CCL, CFL, and CNL. All three theories have three things in common. First, they are formulated in languages containing description terms. Second, they contain a system of modal logic. Third, (...) they do not contain the unrestricted classical substitution principle, but they do contain the classical substitution principle restricted to non-modal formulas and the Carnapian substitution principle, which says that two terms can be substituted salva veritate if they are necessarily coreferential. There are two major differences between the three theories. First, CCL and CFL allow universal instantiation with description terms, whereas CNL does not. Moreover, the quantificational theory of the CCL is classical, whereas the quantificational theory of CFL is a free logic. Another difference is that CCL and CFL contain different description principles. Most importantly, the description principle of CCL ensures that even improper descriptions have a denotation, whereas the description principle of CFL does not guarantee this. CNL does not have a description principle. In the third chapter, I have studied collapse arguments for CCL, CFL, and CNL. A collapse argument is an argument for the following statement: if p is true, then it is necessarily true. A crucial role in the proofs of these collapse results was played by so-called self-predication principles, which say that under certain conditions the predicate that expresses the descriptive condition can be combined by the description term formed out of that predicate with the result being a true sentence. In this chapter I have discussed a collapse argument for the extension of CCL with a self-predication principle, I have given a collapse argument for a similarly extended CFL, and most importantly, I have given a collapse argument for the extension of CNL with a self- predication principle. Finally, I have argued that the relevant self-predication principles are unsound under a Carnapian interpretation. In the fourth chapter, I have studied the extension of Peano Arithmetic with a Carnapian modal logic C, which is a dummy letter standing for either CCL or CFL. One can prove that the principle of the necessity of identity is a theorem of CPA. This implies that one gets a collapse result for CPA. The standard principle of weak induction was crucial for the proof. One can also prove that, if one assumes a particular self-predication principle, and if one assumes the principle of strong induction or, equivalently, the least-number principle, then one gets a partial collapse of de re modal truths in de dicto modal truths. I have argued that, if the box operator is interpreted as a metaphysical necessity operator, then Platonists would not be inimical to the collapse result. But if CPA is extended with a physical theory, then there is a threat that physical truths become physical necessiti es. It was shown that, under a Carnapian interpretation, the standard principle of weak induction is unsound, and that it can be replaced by a Carnapian principle of weak induction that is sound. The problem of logical and mathematical omniscience prevents ordinary Carnapian intensional logic from being taken seriously as a logic adequate for describing the principles of demonstrability. Yet many of the proof-theoretic results of the first part carry over to the part on Carnapian epistemic arithmetic with descriptions, since proof-theoretic results are independent of the informal reading of the operators. In the fifth chapter, I looked at extensions of arithmetic with a modal logic in which the box operator is interpreted as a demonstrability operator. A first extension in that sense is Shapiro s Epistemic Arithmetic. Shapiro himself offered the problem of mathematical omniscience as a reason why it is difficult to find a model theory for EA. Horsten attempted to provide a model theory via the detour of Modal-Epistemic Arithmetic. The attention of the reader was drawn to an incoherence in the model theory of. Two alternative solutions were presented and, after a short discussion of the problem of de re demonstrability one of those alternatives was chosen. The discussion of the problem of de re demonstrability made it clear that it would be interesting to study the epistemic properties of notation systems. Horsten himself provided a framework for this, viz. Carnapian Epistemic Arithmetic, and he started a systematic study of the epistemic properties of notation systems within that framework. However, he did not provide non-trivial but adequate models. To make a start with solving the problem of finding good models for CEA, I introduced Carnapian Modal-Epistemic Arithmetic In constructing CMEA I incorporated the lesson about the principle of weak induction learnt in the fourth chapter. In the sixth chapter, I gave a critical assessment of an argument concerning the limits of de re demonstrability about the natural numbers. The conclusion of the Description Argument is that it is undemonstrable that there is a natural number that has a certain property but of which it is undemonstrable that it has that property. A crucial step in the Description Argument involved a self-predication principle. Making good use of one of the results obtained in the third chapter, I proved a collapse result for the background theory against which the Description Argument was formulated. I concluded that either the either the Description Argument is sound but its conclusion is trivial, o r the Description Argument is unsound, or it is a cheapshot. As an appendix I included an article co-authored by prof. dr. Leon Horsten and me. The topic of the article is indirectly related to some other topics investigated in my dissertation. Also, it backs up one of the addition al theses I might be asked to publicly defend during my doctoral exam. T he topic of the appendix is the set of the so-called paradoxes of strict implication. Jonathan Lowe has argued that a particular variation on C.I. Lewis notion of strict implication avoids the paradoxes of strict implication. Pace Lowe, it is argued that Lowe s notion of implication does not achieve this aim. Moreover, a general argument is offered to the effect that no other variation on Lewis notion of constantly strict implication describes the logical behaviour of natural language conditional s in a satisfactory way. (shrink)

In this paper I argue that, in at least two cases - his discussions of the temporal precedence o f polytheism over monotheism and of the origins of civil society - we see Hume consigning to historical development certain aspects of reason which, as a comparison with Locke will show, have sometimes been held to be uniform. In the first of these cases Hume has recourse to claims about the general historical development of human thought. In the second case, the (...) origin of the civil institution of justice and government is not linked directly to external circumstances and the principles of human nature, as it is in contractarian theories, but makes a detour through the historical acquisition of certain concepts. Because Hume's position does not conform in any simple sense to Dugald Stewart's 'incontrovertible logical maxim' that the capacities of the human mind have been the same in all ages, Stewart's account of the method of conjectural history is, in any simple sense, inadequate as a description of Hume's practice. (shrink)

In this article, I will examine a difficult subject in competitive sports: loss and defeat. Defeat is painful because we do not enter into competitive games to be defeated, although defeat is a strong possible outcome of the game, especially among more or less equal contestants. If losing a game is an existential condition that lies ahead of every athlete and team, even the best ones, why is defeat difficult to accept, especially in modern times in contrast to ancient times? (...) I will explore recent studies and ideas on sacrifice, especially those of Bataille, and discuss Heidegger’s notion of being-toward-death within the context of defeat in sports. Every defeat presupposes a form of sacrifice, understood in the loose sense, and every sacrifice presupposes a certain disposition toward death. Not only is defeat an inevitable condition in sport-making, but it is intrinsically linked to regimes of victory. Nietzsche acknowledges this intrinsic connection between defeat and victory. I will detour into this are.. (shrink)

In this article I bring Giorgio Agamben’s notion of ‘whatever singularity’ into critical pedagogy. I take as my starting point the role of identity within critical pedagogy. I call upon Butler to sketch the debates around the mobilization of identity for political purposes and, conceding the contingent necessity of identity, then suggest that whatever singularity can be helpful in moving critical pedagogy from an emancipatory to a liberatory project. To articulate whatever singularity I situate the concept within the work in (...) which it appears, and then take a detour into Agamben’s general philosophical project. I propose that, for critical pedagogy to take whatever singularity seriously, it must uphold a respect for the ineffability of being, which entails in part the suspension of dialogue. To help flesh out what I mean by this proposal, I turn to a fragment of Lyotard’s philosophy and his critique of democracy. I conclude by addressing a pressing ontological critique of Agamben, which leads me to argue for a materialist appropriation of the figure of whatever singularity, one that is held in tension with ontological concerns of identity. (shrink)

In the year 2002, I came across a manuscript by Jean-Pierre Dupuy that linked the work of Ivan Illich with that of René Girard. I immediately set about translating the text, which was published in Spanish as part of the essay collection The Other Titan: Ivan Illich.1 The original “Detour and Sacrifice” can be found in two books that pay tribute to the authors. The first was compiled by Lee Hoinacki and Carl Mitcham, Illich’s disciples;2 the second is a (...) book edited by Sandor Goodhart, Jorgen Jorgensen, Tom Ryba, and James G. Williams that celebrates Girard’s work.3The genesis of Dupuy’s text actually goes back to 1996 and was inspired by Ivan Illich’s seventieth birthday, which was celebrated with a series of... (shrink)

In my previous Editorial, I took a short detour from the main topic (telepathy and mental privacy) to comment briefly on one of the deeper flaws in the trendy, but seriously misguided, practice of replacing the terms “ESP” and “PK” with (respectively) “anomalous cognition” and “anomalous perturbation.” As I’ve discussed in great detail elsewhere (Braude, 2020), there’s actually quite a lot that’s wrong with this terminological folly. And it’s hardly the only time psi researchers have botched efforts to explicate (...) or replace some of the field’s key concepts. The terminological error that I discussed in my earlier Editorial was the failure to accommodate the valuable distinction between ESP-cognition and ESP-interaction. And in that Editorial, I also noted that another, and increasingly trendy, practice likewise commits this error. It’s the strategy of abandoning the venerable arsenal of psi-terms and replacing them with a single expression—either “nonlocal awareness” or “nonlocal consciousness.” (The underlying rationale for this is usually that the traditional vocabulary is likely to be professionally toxic.) I’m thinking about these matters again because recent events have conspired to remind me of still another, but less trendy and prevalent, approach to parapsychological terminology that also deserves a few words of disapproval. (shrink)

In this paper I comment on the arguments put forth by Robert Rosenberger and Galit Wellner on the issue of using a mobile phone while driving a car, and I do this by way of a detour through the work of Kevin Kelly and Marshall McLuhan. While Rosenberger and Wellner focus first and foremost on the possibilities and impossibilities within the human organism, I seek to add to the debate the however experimental standpoint of the technologies “themselves.”.

In this article, I present the concept of narrative in Ricoeur’s thinking as an epistemological tool that grants access to the meaning of human being. For Ricoeur, a narrative is meaningful when it is understood as an articulation of time as a dimension of our being. By articulating time humans express their very existence as humans and have access to the meaning of it. The narrative, as an epistemological path to this meaning, also has ontological implications. The dimension of narrativity (...) is then not only a tool for epistemological reflection, but also the milieu of our existence. The narrative as epistemological ‘detour’ becomes a structural element of being. Thus human beings find themselves in a paradoxical position of distance and involvement. Consequently, a firm and stable ontology can no longer be reached. Rather, ontology operates from out of a dynamical concept of being in which the contribution of language should be considered. I conclude this article by pointing to Ricoeur’s emphasis on language and narrative, resulting from his linguistic turn, and leading him to onto-logy. (shrink)

Cognitive scientists of religion promise to lay bare the cognitive mechanisms that generate religious beliefs in human beings. Defenders of the debunking argument believe that the cognitive mechanisms studied in this field pose a threat to folk theism. A number of influential responses to the debunking argument rely on making two sets of distinctions: proximate/ultimate explanations and specific/general religious beliefs. I argue, however, that such responses have drawbacks and do not make room for folk theism. I suggest that a (...) class='Hi'>detour through the literature in the philosophy of mind regarding the problem of mental causation regarding nonreductive physicalism can provide a way for preserving folk theism without doing violence to the way cognitive science of religion is being practiced today. More specifically, I believe there is a way of responding to the debunking argument that does not require a rejection of the causal premise. (shrink)

Schwichtenberg showed that the System T definable functionals are closed under a rule-like version Spector’s bar recursion of lowest type levels 0 and 1. More precisely, if the functional Y which controls the stopping condition of Spector’s bar recursor is T-definable, then the corresponding bar recursion of type levels 0 and 1 is already T-definable. Schwichtenberg’s original proof, however, relies on a detour through Tait’s infinitary terms and the correspondence between ordinal recursion for α < ε₀ and primitive recursion (...) over finite types. This detour makes it hard to calculate on given concrete system T input, what the corresponding system T output would look like. In this paper we present an alternative (more direct) proof based on an explicit construction which we prove correct via a suitably defined logical relation. We show through an example how this gives a straightforward mechanism for converting bar recursive definitions into T-definitions under the conditions of Schwichtenberg’s theorem. Finally, with the explicit construction we can also easily state a sharper result: if Y is in the fragment Tᵢ then terms built from BR^ℕ,σ for this particular Y are definable in the fragment T_i+max{1,level(σ)}+2. (shrink)

Responding to Gil Anidjar's “Jesus and Monotheism” and its posing of the “Christian Question,” in this paper I return to Freud's Moses and Monotheism and its narrative of Jewish self-division. In highlighting the retroactive formation of identity, I note both its temporal dimension and the force of exclusivity it generates. This reading suggests a contrast between such theo-political communities, with their legacies of affiliation, and Christian self-absolution (the refusal of constitutive self-division) with its image of a new man. I take (...) a brief detour through Marx and Schmitt to examine the founding structures of secular modernity and the entanglement of liberalism with Christianity. Pursuing a hint offered by Anidjar that Christianity is not quite a tradition, I conclude that for Freud, the “Christian question” emerges as a kind of enigma: the dream of a community divorced from human modes of transmission, unbound by legacies of filiation to the past, and replacing the collective memory of a people with the end of human collectivity. (shrink)

Le conflit des interprétationsCes « essais d'herméneutique » réunissent des textes qui portent la marque du bouillonnement intellectuel des années 1960. Les sciences humaines font éclater les cadres reçus de l'interprétation, et créent même un « conflit des interprétations ». Le premier mérite de Ricœur, infatigable lecteur, est alors de reprendre longuement ce que disent les sciences de l'homme - linguistique, sémiologie, ethnologie, psychanalyse... - pour mesurer comment et pourquoi naît ce conflit.On est loin ici de toute « voie courte (...) », d'une philosophie se contentant de rappeler à hauts cris le « sens » face à la « mort du sujet ». S'il s'agit « d'explorer les voies ouvertes à la philosophie contemporaine » par cette nouvelle donne, il faut passer par le détour de l'analyse longue. Un détour, plutôt rare dans l'aire de la philosophie française, est ainsi très présent : il passe par l'exégèse biblique et des disciplines religieuses, qui furent à l'origine du problème herméneutique. Au terme de cette analyse seulement, il sera possible à nouveau de « donner un sens acceptable à la notion d'existence ».Paul Ricœur (1913-2005)Philosophe, monument de la philosophie française du XXe°siècle, il n'a cessé de nouer un dialogue avec les sciences humaines dans leur diversité et renouvelé les recherches exégétiques et bibliques.Préface de Jean Greisch Préface Note de l'éditeur Existence et herméneutique Structure et herméneutique Le problème du double-sens La structure, le mot, l'événement Le conscient et l'inconscient La psychanalyse et le mouvement de la culture contemporaine Une interprétation philosophique de Freud Technique et non-technique dans l'interprétation L'art et la systématique freudienne L'acte et le signe selon Jean Nabert Heidegger et la question du sujet La question du sujet : le défi de la sémiologie Le « péché originel » : étude de signification Herméneutique des symboles et réflexion philosophique (I) Herméneutique des symboles et réflexion philosophique (II) Démythiser l'accusation Interprétation du mythe de la peine Préface à Bultmann La liberté selon l'espérance Culpabilité, éthique et religion Religion,athéisme, foi La paternité : du fantasme au symbole Sources Ouvrages cités. (shrink)

Arguments in favor of anti-representationalism in cognitive science often suffer from a lack of attention to detail. The purpose of this paper is to fill in the gaps in these arguments, and in so doing show that at least one form of anti- representationalism is potentially viable. After giving a teleological definition of representation and applying it to a few models that have inspired anti- representationalist claims, I argue that anti-representationalism must be divided into two distinct theses, one ontological, one (...) epistemological. Given the assumptions that define the debate, I give reason to think that the ontological thesis is false. I then argue that the epistemological thesis might, in the end, turn out to be true, despite a potentially serious difficulty. Along the way, there will be a brief detour to discuss a controversy from early twentieth century physics. (shrink)

L’histoire du texte des Régles pour la Direction de l’Esprit (Regulae) de Descartes est un peu singulière: non publié du vivant de Descartes, il n’a paru qu’en 1701, dans les Opera Posthuma d’Amsterdam. De façon plus significative, et contrairement aux autres traités cartésiens perdus, ce texte secret n’est jamais explicitement evoqué par Descartes, fût-ce au détour d’une correspondance. Par leur étroite dépendance vis à vis des mathématiques, les Regulae sont cependant un texte majeur, constitutives de la pensée de leur auteur (...) dans ses années de jeunesse (1619-1628), et par là de toute la philosophie moderne. Descartes avait jugé le texte suffisamment important pour I’emmener à Stockholm, où il a été découvert apres sa mort, dans ses papiers.Entre les mathématiques et les Regulae, ce texte “éclatant et obscur” (J.P. Weber), il est ces trois types principaux de rapports croisés que nous tâcherons d’analyser: historiquement d’abord, quelles furent la formation et I’expérience mathématique du jeune Descartes, qui constituerent, à notre sens, I’armature conceptuelle du texte. Quelles sont ensuite les voies par lesquelles, dans les Regulae, Descartes a putransmuer cette expérience mathématique premiere à la fois en une pratique, une méthode, une théorie de la connaissance, enfin en une épistémologie assez radicalement neuve. Enfin, et prenant Descartes au sérieux nous examinerons à I’occasion cette question: quel est le sort réservé, de nos jours, à cette épistémologie cartésienne, en particulier confrontée aux mathématiques contemporaines? (shrink)

From Kant’s first published work to recent articles in the physics literature, philosophers and physicists have long sought an answer to the question, why does space have three dimensions. In this paper, I will flesh out Kant’s claim with a brief detour through Gauss’ law. I then describe Büchel’s version of the common argument that stable orbits are possible only if space is three-dimensional. After examining objections by Russell and van Fraassen, I develop three original criticisms of my own. (...) These criticisms are relevant to both historical and contemporary proofs of the dimensionality of space (in particular, a recent one by Burgbacher, F. Lämmerzahl, C., and Macias). In general I argue that modern “proofs” of the dimensionality of space have gone off track. (shrink)

Pragmatic encroachment theories have a problem with evidence. On the one hand, the arguments that knowledge is interest-relative look like they will generalise to show that evidence too is interest-relative. On the other hand, our best story of how interests affect knowledge presupposes an interest-invariant notion of evidence. -/- The aim of this paper is to sketch a theory of evidence that is interest-relative, but which allows that ‘best story’ to go through with minimal changes. The core idea is that (...) the evidence someone has is just what evidence a radical interpreter says they have. And a radical interpreter is playing a kind of game with the person they are interpreting. The cases that pose problems for pragmatic encroachment theorists generate fascinating games between the interpreter and the interpretee. They are games with multiple equilibria. To resolve them we need to detour into the theory of equilibrium selection. I’ll argue that the theory we need is the theory of risk-dominant equilibria. That theory will tell us how the interpreter will play the game, which in turn will tell us what evidence the person has. The evidence will be interest-relative, because what the equilibrium of the game is will be interest-relative. But it will not undermine the story we tell about how interests usually affect knowledge. (shrink)

My intellectual journey in philosophy proceeded along two mountainous paths that coincided at their base, but forked less than halfway up the incline. The first is that of my philosophical development, a steep but steady and continuous ascent. It began in my family, and accelerated in high school, art school, college, and graduate school. Those foundations propelled my philosophical research into the nature of rationality and its relation to the structure of the self, a long-term project focused on the Kantian (...) and Humean metaethical traditions in Anglo-American analytic philosophy. It would have been impossible to bring this project to completion without the anchor, compass, and conceptual mapping provided by my prior, longstanding involvement in the practice and theory of Vedic philosophy. The second path is that of my professional route through the field of academic philosophy, which branched onto a rocky detour in graduate school, followed by a short but steep ascent, followed next by a much steeper, sustained descent off that road, into the ravine, down in flames, and out of the profession. In order to reach the summit of the first path, I had to reach the nadir of the second. It was the right decision. My yoga practice cushioned my landing. (shrink)

The article offers a critical but sympathetic reflection on the development of classical and post-classical French sociology. From Comte onwards, I suggest, the modern French treatment of the social has been preoccupied with socio-theological questions; and even with the radical deconstruction of any society-god, this continues to be the case. There are distinctive historical reasons for this (including the Catholic inheritance and an enduring legitimacy problem for the Republican state); but the significance of the issues raised by this intellectual tradition (...) as a result goes beyond the limits of national context. In an age of post-histoire and the `death' of everything, the `French' travails of social ontology, including the quasi-religious register in which these have occurred, have deep and continuing import for any would-be progressive social theory as such. We need to rethink the `we'. With such considerations in mind, the body of the article considers Comte's concept of Humanity and Baudrillard's `end of the social' as exemplifying key aspects of the beginning (reconstructive) and ending (deconstructive) phases of the French sociological story. What began as a detour in the `death of God', I argue, has terminated in a `second death of God' in which a replacement divinity and the rationalist faith associated with it have disintegrated and become impossible to think. But the logic of this development has not been straightforward. It is marked by a double paradox. An interrogation of Comte's `Humanity' reveals it to be a semi-conscious exercise in simulation, haunted by the implications of its own emptiness. On the one hand, then, the attempted religious founding founded nothing (it made a transcendent of its own intended re-socializing effects). On the other hand, as exemplified by Baudrillard's pronouncements about the end of the social, the moment of disintegration has itself seemed to offer a new socio-theological opening. Rather than mourn the anomic or hyper-real impossibility of a transcending `we', Baudrillard would shift terrain in a quasi-Nietzschean (or Bataillian) transvaluation. This implies (against Baudrillard himself) not the definitive end of the French `sociological' project, but the possibility of its continuation, albeit under erasure and in a new key. (shrink)