Toujours, les révolutions s'inversent en terreur, la libération fait naître la domination, le pouvoir abuse, ment, échoue... Pourquoi continue-t-on pourtant à croire que le gouvernement des hommes a pour but de transformer la société alors qu'il se réduit souvent à une gestion de la situation? C'est cette question qui résonne singulièrement en ces temps de changement de gouvernance que lance ici Etienne Tassin, se reposant sur une formule de Merleau-Ponty : "On veut oublier un problème que l'Europe soupçonne depuis (...) les Grecs : n'y a-t-il pas un maléfice de la vie à plusieurs?" Les Grecs seront donc nos guides pour éclairer notre démocratie contemporaine, Oreste pour appréhender la question de la justice, Oedipe celle du maléfice, Antigone la dissidence, Socrate l'utopie, Caton les révolutions, Gygès les oubliés du régime libéral, Achille le courage, Diogène la question des migrants... Ils nous aideront à affronter cette idée tragique : il n'y a pas de bonne solution, la politique n'est pas une affaire de réussite ou d'échec mais de risque, celui de vivre à plusieurs. Elle est la condition humaine. (shrink)

Al iniciar con la discusión suscitada por la redacción de los artículos 10 y 11 de la Declaración de los derechos humanos y del ciudadano de 1789, Etienne Tassin establece la diferencia entre la tolerancia como principio de cortesía democrática y la laicidad como principio de ciudadanía republicana. El autor sugiere que la laicidad es la política de la tolerancia cuando la tolerancia es la ética de la política, y que la forma republicana del poder político es la condición (...) de posibilidad de una sociedad democrática. Se puede, entonces, entender que la intransigencia política de la laicidad es como la condición trascendental de la tolerancia civil en el seno de las sociedades democráticas, o incluso que la intransigencia cívica es la única manera de garantizar la tolerancia civil. (shrink)

Normal 0 21 false false false ES X-NONE X-NONE MicrosoftInternetExplorer4 /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Tabla normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0cm; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;} It has been said that the man whose rights are given through the Declaration of human rights is nothing but a formal abstraction driven by an irresolvable antinomy: either this man is taken prior to any political (...) institution in a kind of state of nature and the so-called human rights are not the rights of the citizen, or this man is seen according to the social determinations that result from the historic community to which he belongs. This antinomy has led to interpret the Declaration from an individualistic and liberal perspective, or to the negation of any political value to Human Rights. These theses that oppose man and citizen ignore another paradox that Hanna Arendt made evident when she underlined that human and citizenship rights only have any consistency because of a more fundamental right to have rights which surpasses the antinomy that grounds most criticisms against human rights and that allows for the actually political dimension of the humanity of beings to appear. (shrink)

AU cœur de la vie politique des hommes gît un trésor, aujourd'hui perdu. Les révolutionnaires du XVIIIe siècle pouvaient encore le nommer. En Amérique on l'appelait " bonheur public ", dans la France des Lumières son nom était " liberté publique ". EN certaines circonstances, rares et précaires, ce trésor sans âge ressurgit dans l'action politique conduite à plusieurs, lorsqu'elle se crée un espace public où la liberté peut paraître. Alors un lien se noue, qui déploie entre les hommes un (...) monde commun. Tel est le bien public. En évoquant ce trésor perdu, la philosophie d'Hannah Arendt nous invite à retrouver, à l'écart de tout pragmatisme comme de tout moralisme, le sens instituant de l'action politique qui a le monde comme condition et comme fin. C'est dans la mesure où les actions sont politiques que le monde peut être partagé ; et dans la mesure où elles visent un monde commun que ces actions sont proprement politiques. Toute politique s'apprécie au regard du monde qu'elle est susceptible d'instaurer. N'est-ce pas pourtant à l'aliénation du monde que la politique moderne nous condamne au contraire? Le trésor serait-il pour nous définitivement perdu? Ce livre suggère que, loin de proposer une philosophie politique parmi d'autres, la réflexion arendtienne inaugure une intelligence de l'action politique qui redonne sens au " vivre-ensemble ". En son cœur se tient l'analyse originale et décisive de ce qu'on peut nommer l'acosmisme du monde moderne, cette perte du monde éprouvée aussi bien dans le système totalitaire que dans la prétention technoscientifique de nos sociétés à maîtriser les conditions de l'existence. (shrink)

This is the introduction to the symposium on Maxime Lepoutre, Democratic Speech in Divided Times (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2021). The symposium contains articles by Paul Billingham, Rachel Fraser, and Michael Hannon, and a response by the author.

L'ouvrage rend hommage au travail de Miguel Abensour et met en évidence les apports et innovations dans le domaine de la philosophie politique critique. Différents chercheurs de nombreux pays prolongent par leurs travaux les perspectives ouvertes par Miguel Abensour.

This article defends the democratic ideal of inclusive public discourse, as articulated in Democratic Speech in Divided Times, against the critiques offered by Billingham, Fraser, and Hannon. Specifically, it considers and responds to three core challenges. The first challenge argues, notably, that the “shared reasons” constraint should either apply everywhere or not at all, and that, if this constraint is to apply in divided circumstances, its justificatory constituency must be idealized. The second challenge contends that the resistance of hate speech (...) and misinformation to counterspeech cannot adequately be explained by considerations of salience, and therefore cannot adequately by countered (as I suggest) by “positive” forms of counterspeech. Finally, the last challenge objects that the ideal of inclusive public discourse I defend remains, as pessimists allege, excessively idealistic. (shrink)

Philosophy &Public Affairs, Volume 52, Issue 2, Page 106-146, Spring 2024.

The use of artificial intelligence (AI) to aid legal decision making has become prominent. This paper investigates the use of AI in a critical issue in employment law, the determination of a worker’s status—employee vs. independent contractor—in two common law countries (the U.S. and Canada). This legal question has been a contentious labor issue insofar as independent contractors are not eligible for the same benefits as employees. It has become an important societal issue due to the ubiquity of the gig (...) economy and the recent disruptions in employment arrangements. To address this problem, we collected, annotated, and structured the data for all Canadian and Californian court cases related to this legal question between 2002 and 2021, resulting in 538 Canadian cases and 217 U.S. cases. In contrast to legal literature focusing on complex and correlated characteristics of the employment relationship, our statistical analyses of the data show very strong correlations between the worker’s status and a small subset of quantifiable characteristics of the employment relationship. In fact, despite the variety of situations in the case law, we show that simple, off-the-shelf AI models classify the cases with an out-of-sample accuracy of more than 90%. Interestingly, the analysis of misclassified cases reveals consistent misclassification patterns by most algorithms. Legal analyses of these cases led us to identify how equity is ensured by judges in ambiguous situations. Finally, our findings have practical implications for access to legal advice and justice. We deployed our AI model via the open-access platform, https://MyOpenCourt.org/, to help users answer employment legal questions. This platform has already assisted many Canadian users, and we hope it will help democratize access to legal advice to large crowds. (shrink)

This present book explores recent advances in modeling discourse processes, in particular, new approaches aimed at understanding pathological language behavior specific to schizophrenia. The contributors examine the modeling paradigm of formal semantics, which falls within the scope of both linguistics and logic while providing overlapping links with other fields such as philosophy of language and cognitive psychology. This book is based on results presented during the series of workshops on Coherence and Discourse organized by SLAM, a project developed to systemize (...) the study of pathological language processing by taking an overarching interdisciplinary approach combining psychology, linguistics, computer science and philosophy. The principle focus is on conversations produced by people with psychiatric disorders such as schizophrenia and autism. The contributions come from young and experienced researchers, and invited speakers. The book appeals to likeminded students and researchers. (shrink)

This article offers a critique of the central role afforded to the rights/sentience-based moral argument in the rhetorical strategy of the animal rights movement since the 1970s. Though important for articulating the movement’s philosophy and recruiting new activists, this argument has limited persuasive appeal, as suggested by the common failure of liberation movements to achieve their goals through moral advocacy. A two-prong approach addressing human health and environmental effects of animal agriculture is offered both as a supplemental strategy for reaching (...) audiences unaffected by the moral argument and as a critical means of strengthening that argument. (shrink)

Maxime Vachon | Résumé : Le but de cet article est de mettre en lumière les apories sur l’existence du temps et sur le maintenant telles que présentées dans la première partie du chapitre IV, 10 de la Physique d’Aristote par une traduction et un commentaire de ce texte. Plus précisément, l’auteur tente de dégager les présupposés philosophiques des apories en question, notamment à partir des occurrences du verbe histanai et de ses composés. |: The aim of this article (...) is to shed light upon the aporias about the existence of time and about the now as presented in the first part of chapter IV, 10 of Aristotle’s Physics through a translation and a commentary of this text. More precisely, the author attempts to bring out the philosophical presuppositions of the aporias, especially in consideration of the occurrences of the verb histanai and its compounds. (shrink)

Maxime Vachon | : L’objectif de cet article est de montrer l’unité du chapitre 14 du Peri Hermeneias, chapitre dans lequel Aristote retourne au fondement de l’échange dialectique, à savoir la doxa. Je montre ainsi que ce chapitre expose progressivement les trois conditions sémantiques que des points de vue doivent respecter pour être contraires : le sujet doit être le même, l’objet doit aussi être le même, mais le mode de prédication doit être contradictoire. | : The aim of (...) this paper is to show the unity of chapter 14 of the Peri Hermeneias, in which chapter Aristotle goes back to the basis of dialectical exchange, that is doxa. Thus I show that this chapter presents in successive order the three semantical conditions that points of view must respect in order to be contrary : the subject has to be the same, the object has also to be the same, but the mode of predication must be contradictory. (shrink)

In an ideal democracy, people from all walks of life would come together to talk meaningfully and respectfully about politics. But we do not live in an ideal democracy. In contemporary democracies, which are marked by deep social divisions, different groups for the most part avoid talking to each other. And when they do talk to each other, their speech often seems to be little more than a vehicle for rage, hatred, and deception. -/- Democratic Speech in Divided Times argues (...) that we should nevertheless not give up on the ideal of democratic public speech. Drawing on the resources of political theory, epistemology, and philosophy of language, this book develops a sustained account of the norms that should govern public discourse in deeply divided circumstances. Should we try to find common ground when we talk to our political opponents, even though they seem unreasonable? Should we refrain from expressing anger, if we want to get things done? How can we use our speech to fight hate speech and disinformation? And is it even possible to speak to 'the other side,' in settings where different groups dislike one another, live apart from one another, and don't know much about one another? By tackling these questions, Lepoutre demonstrates that, when governed by the right set of norms, public speech can be a powerful force for good even amidst profound social divisions. (shrink)

Maxime F. Giguère Cet article propose une nouvelle stratégie pour écarter la conclusion sceptique, mise de l’avant par Thomas Szasz, selon laquelle la psychiatrie est illégitime. La conclusion sceptique repose sur une démarcation radicale entre troubles mentaux et somatiques. Afin de minimiser cette démarcation, Jerome Wakefield emploie une analyse conceptuelle stipulant que les troubles mentaux et somatiques sont tous les deux des dysfonctions préjudiciables. De récentes critiques ont toutefois montré que son analyse bute sur la difficulté pratique de distinguer (...) les fonctions normales des dysfonctions. En raison de ce problème, l’analyse de Wakefield ne permet pas d’écarter la conclusion sceptique. Une nouvelle stratégie ne nécessitant pas de résoudre le problème reconnu par ces critiques s’annonce alors préférable pour écarter la conclusion sceptique. (shrink)

In the proposed article by Maxim Isaenko "Ukrainian Christian tradition of state creation... "on the question of application A comparative methodological approach is presented in the analysis conceptual dispositions available in Ukrainian, Polish, and Russian types of state-building and organization of power institutions. Studying socio-legal models that are characteristic of three Slavic peoples, vectors of kinship and distance are outlined understanding of the phenomena of the state, power, law.

During the Zimbabwean crisis, millions crossed through the apartheid-era border fence, searching for ways to make ends meet. Maxim Bolt explores the lives of Zimbabwean migrant labourers, of settled black farm workers and their dependants, and of white farmers and managers, as they intersect on the border between Zimbabwe and South Africa. Focusing on one farm, this book investigates the role of a hub of wage labour in a place of crisis. A close ethnographic study, it addresses the complex, shifting (...) labour and life conditions in northern South Africa's agricultural borderlands. Underlying these challenges are the Zimbabwean political and economic crisis of the 2000s and the intensified pressures on commercial agriculture in South Africa following market liberalization and post-apartheid land reform. But, amidst uncertainty, farmers and farm workers strive for stability. The farms on South Africa's margins are centers of gravity, islands of residential labour in a sea of informal arrangements. (shrink)

Intensity profiles of emotional experience over time have been found to differ primarily in explosiveness and accumulation. However, the determinants of these temporal features remain poorly understood. In two studies, we examined whether emotion regulation strategies are predictive of the degree of explosiveness and accumulation of negative emotional episodes. Participants were asked to draw profiles reflecting changes in the intensity of emotions elicited either by negative social feedback in the lab or by negative events in daily life. In addition, trait, (...) and state usage of a set of emotion regulation strategies was assessed. Multilevel analyses revealed that trait rumination was positively associated with emotion accumulation. State rumination was also positively associated with emotion accumulation and, to a lesser extent, with emotion explosiveness. These results provide support for emotion regulation theories, which hypothesise that rumination is a central mechanism underlying the maintenance of negative emotions. (shrink)

Jeremy Waldron, among others, has forcefully argued that public hate speech assaults the dignity of its targets. Without denying this claim, I contend that it fails to establish that bans, rather than counterspeech, are the appropriate response. By articulating a more refined understanding of counterspeech, I suggest that counterspeech constitutes a better way of blocking hate speech’s dignitarian harm. In turn, I address two objections: according to the first, which draws on contemporary philosophy of language, counterspeech does not block enough (...) hate speech; according to the second, counterspeech blocks too much speech. Although these objections should qualify our optimism regarding counterspeech, I demonstrate that each can be turned, with even greater force, against hate speech bans. (shrink)

Name der Zeitschrift: Klio Jahrgang: 98 Heft: 2 Seiten: 495-525.

According to an influential objection, which Martha Nussbaum has powerfully restated, expressing anger in democratic public discourse is counterproductive from the standpoint of justice. To resist this challenge, this article articulates a crucial yet underappreciated sense in which angry discourse is epistemically productive. Drawing on recent developments in the philosophy of emotion, which emphasize the distinctive phenomenology of emotion, I argue that conveying anger to one’s listeners is epistemically valuable in two respects: first, it can direct listeners’ attention to elusive (...) morally relevant features of the situation; second, it enables them to register injustices that their existing evaluative categories are not yet suited to capturing. Thus, when employed skillfully, angry speech promotes a greater understanding of existing injustices. This epistemic role is indispensable in highly divided societies, where the injustices endured by some groups are often invisible to, or misunderstood by, other... (shrink)

The notions of perceptual normativity and optimality have generated much discussion in the last decade or so in the literature on Merleau-Ponty. Husserl’s position on the topic has been far less extensively investigated. Surprisingly, however, Husserl wrote a great deal about the question of perceptual optimality. Not only are there a considerable number of important passages scattered throughout the manuscripts, the archive also contains a few important full texts on precisely this issue. Given the role of fulfillment for Husserl’s concept (...) of intentionality, this should not really come as a surprise, since the teleological nature of the fulfillment structure terminates in an experience of the optimum. Hence, however marginal this topic might seem at first glance, reflecting on it rapidly leads us to the heart of Husserl’s project and sheds further light on his conception of intentional experience. (shrink)

Philosophy &Public Affairs, Volume 48, Issue 1, Page 40-78, Winter 2020.

This is a survey paper giving a self-contained account of Shelah's theory of the pcf function pcf={cf:D is an ultrafilter on a}, where a is a set of regular cardinals such that a

Logic and Philosophy of Logic

Logic and Philosophy of Logic, Miscellaneous in Logic and Philosophy of Logic

Model Theory in Logic and Philosophy of Logic

Direct download (4 more)  

 

Export citation  

 

Bookmark   32 citations  

An influential critique of anger holds that anger comes at an important epistemic cost. In particular, feeling angry typically makes risk less visible to us. This is anger’s ‘red mist.’ These epistemic costs, critics suggest, arguably outweigh the epistemic benefits commonly ascribed to anger. This essay argues that the epistemic critique of anger is importantly misleading. This is not because it underestimates anger’s epistemic benefits, but rather because it overlooks the fact that anger’s red mist performs a crucial moral function. (...) By concealing risk, the red mist helps protect the dignity and self-respect of those who live under severe and unchosen risk. This function is vitally important in non-ideal circumstances, where many are unjustly subjected to dignity-impairing risk. And it is irreplaceable, in that it cannot readily be performed by other political emotions, such as hope. Beyond providing a novel defence of anger, this argument has a broader upshot. Anger’s red mist reveals that ignorance is not always problematic in politics. Accordingly, it should not be treated—as has standardly been the case—as an unmitigated political evil. In the first instance, our efforts are better spent ascertaining when ignorance is a problem, and when, instead, it performs a felicitous function. (shrink)

Reading Of An Apocalyptic Tone Recently Adopted in Philosophy poses difficult questions of interpretation. We have indeed to account for multiple and often entangled themes as we have to deal with Derrida’s apparent inconsistency between his criticism of the apocalyptic tone in philosophy and his own use of that particular tone in his discourse. This article sheds light on this apparent ambiguity by drawing a parallel between the question of tone in hegelian philosophy and the “apocalyptic” thread of the “end (...) of philosophy” emphasized upon in Of An Apocalyptic Tone… Such a comparison provides us with a fresh understanding of that central thread of the book and helps in return unraveling the derridean debate with Kant and his heirs which relates to the possibility and the limits of demystification. (shrink)

The recent publication of Geschlecht III allows us, for the first time, to synoptically embrace the Geschlecht project and to appreciate its overarching consistency. I choose to read the Geschlecht series as the scene of an inheritance whereby Derrida wrestles with Heidegger’s legacy. More specifically, I identify the linchpin of Derrida’s critique of gathering (Versammlung), which organizes his reading throughout the series. I then distinguish between two layers within this reading : the first, wherein he stages the refusal of an (...) inheritance deemed metaphysical or suspicious, and the less well-known second, which sets the stage for a shared heritage (gift, promise, economy). The value of gathering thus consecutively appears on one and the other side of these dividing lines, until the legacy’s pluralization turns out to be what’s at stake in the scene. (shrink)

Faced with hate speech, oppressed groups can use their own speech to respond to their verbal oppressors. This “counterspeech,” however, sometimes itself takes on a hateful form. This paper explores the moral standing of such “hateful counterspeech.” Is there a fundamental moral asymmetry between hateful counterspeech, and the hateful utterances of dominant or oppressive groups? Or are claims that such an asymmetry exists indefensible? I argue for an intermediate position. There _is_ a key moral asymmetry between these two forms of (...) speech. But, this asymmetry notwithstanding, hateful counterspeech is capable of enacting serious harms—and so, contrary to what many legal theorists have argued, it is in principle an appropriate object of legal regulation. I begin by considering the central argument for thinking that hateful counterspeech is not seriously troubling. This argument holds that oppressed groups lack authority—and, by extension, “speaker power.” Yet this argument, I suggest, sits in tension with the fact that low-status members of dominant groups can, through their utterances, seriously harm members of oppressed groups. Philosophers of language have developed sophisticated arguments to explain this last phenomenon: they have argued that speaker power is relativised to particular jurisdictions; that it can be acquired dynamically in local settings; and that it is socially dispersed. I argue that, in light of these arguments, it appears that hateful counterspeech, too, can generate serious harms. Nevertheless, I show that this conclusion is compatible with recognising a crucial moral asymmetry between hateful counterspeech and the hate speech of oppressors. (shrink)

In philosophical debates about immigration, one of the most prominent arguments asserts that a state’s citizenry has a right to unilaterally control its territorial borders by virtue of its right to self-determination. This is the self-determination argument. The present article demonstrates that this argument is internally undermined by the Coercion Principle, according to which all persons subjected to coercive political power are entitled to an equal say in exercising that power. First, whichever way the self-determination argument identifies the relevant self-determining (...) self, it is bound to rely on the Coercion Principle. Specifying the self politically involves appealing to the Coercion Principle, as it is a core principle of democratic theory. Alternatively, specifying a pre-political self fails to circumvent this problem, as a similar issue arises further down the argumentative line, when inferring the right to unilaterally control borders from the right to self-determination. Finally, since border controls coerce would-be immigrants, this reliance on the Coercion Principle renders the self-determination argument self-defeating. (shrink)