Fighting for the Mantle of Science: the Epistemological Foundations of Neoliberalism, 1931-1951

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Fighting for the Mantle of Science: the Epistemological Foundations of Neoliberalism, 1931-1951 Université de Montréal Fighting for the Mantle of Science: The Epistemological Foundations of Neoliberalism, 1931-1951 par Martin Beddeleem Département de science politique Faculté des arts et des sciences Thèse présentée en vue de l’obtention du grade de Philosophiæ Doctor (Ph.D.) en science politique Décembre 2017 © Martin Beddeleem, 2017 RÉSUMÉ Cette thèse examine la genèse intellectuelle du néolibéralisme au prisme de son épistémologie. Elle interroge le développement de ses arguments concernant la production et la diffusion de la connaissance, guidée par l’hypothèse que la formulation d’une position épistémologique commune a été cruciale pour la consolidation de son programme idéologique. Je propose que le néolibéralisme, en provoquant une rupture avec le libéralisme classique, a opéré un recodage des principes libéraux à l’intérieur d’un cadre épistémologique basé sur le conventionnalisme, à l’aide de prémisses tirées des sciences naturelles, de la théorie économique, et de la philosophie des sciences. Afin d’obtenir un panorama contextuel de son émergence, cette thèse fournit une reconstruction des débats intellectuels des années 1930 en Angleterre sur deux plans principaux : le débat sur la planification de la science, et celui sur la planification de l’économie. Dans un climat propice aux idées planistes, perçues comme davantage rationnelles et scientifiques, les néolibéraux précoces s’attelèrent à montrer la portée limitée de la science positive pour orienter les décisions politiques. La montée du totalitarisme contribua à donner à leur discours une urgence singulière, puisqu’il expliquait le recours au collectivisme étatique par la prégnance d’opinions scientifiques erronées. Pendant la Seconde Guerre mondiale, la formation d’un réseau néolibéral déclencha une fertilisation croisée entre ces différents penseurs, dont l’agenda commun avait été défini au moment du Colloque Walter-Lippmann en 1938. En développant leurs intuitions sur le fonctionnement interne de la science et de l’économie comme modèles de coopération libre, Michael Polanyi, Friedrich Hayek, Louis Rougier, Walter Lippmann, et Karl Popper, élaborèrent une théorie sociale cohérente, qui supportaient les idéaux libéraux sur de nouvelles bases épistémologiques. Pour eux, le désir de mener une politique « scientifique » relevait d’un aveuglement méthodologique issu d’une mécompréhension de la nature de la connaissance et du travail scientifique, ainsi que d’une conception disproportionnée de leur potentiel. En reliant de manière analogique la liberté scientifique, avec celle garantie par le marché ou la règle de droit, la position de la pensée et de la connaissance dans la société est devenue leur préoccupation principale. Ce recodage met en lumière la forme particulière de l’idéologie néolibérale : la compétition et les marchés sont redéfinis comme procédures de découverte, les traditions sont perçues comme des réservoirs de connaissance tacite, et les institutions sont conçues comme les préconditions et les résultats d’ordres spontanés. L’institutionnalisation de ce collectif de pensée fragmentaire lors de la fondation de la Société du Mont-Pèlerin en 1947 révéla à la fois l’ambition idéologique de ce projet et ses limites immédiates. Mots-clés : épistémologie, Friedrich Hayek, histoire des sciences, idéologie, Louis Rougier, Michael Polanyi, néolibéralisme, Société du Mont-Pèlerin, sociologie de la connaissance, Walter Lippmann i ABSTRACT This dissertation examines the intellectual genesis of neoliberalism through the prism of its epistemology. It interrogates the development of its arguments regarding the production and diffusion of knowledge, guided by the hypothesis that formulating a common epistemological stance was crucial for the consolidation of its ideological program. I propose that early neoliberalism, by provoking a rupture with classical liberalism, recoded liberal principles into an epistemological framework based on conventionalism, with premises drawn from the natural sciences, economic theory, and the philosophy of science. To achieve a contextual picture of its emergence, the dissertation provides a reconstruction of the intellectual debates of the 1930s in England on two major fronts: the debate on planning in science, and the debate on planning in the economy. Amidst a general enthusiasm for planning ideas perceived as being more rational and scientific, early neoliberals warned of the limited value of positive science in guiding policy decisions. The rise of totalitarianism gave their discourse a dramatic urgency as it explicitly linked faulty scientific views with the rise of state collectivism. During the Second World War, the formation of a neoliberal network triggered a cross-fertilization between these early neoliberal thinkers, whose common agenda had been defined at the Walter-Lippmann Colloquium in 1938. Drawing from their intuitions about the inner workings of science and the economy held as models of free cooperation, Michael Polanyi, Friedrich Hayek, Louis Rougier, Walter Lippmann, and Karl Popper, cemented a coherent social theory which vindicated liberal ideals on new epistemological grounds. To them, the aspiration towards ‘scientific’ politics denoted a methodological delusion built on a misunderstanding of the nature of knowledge and of scientific work, as well as on a hubristic conception of their potential. By linking analogically the freedom experienced by the scientist, to the one guaranteed by the market or by the rule of law, the position of thought and knowledge in society became their core concern. Paying attention to this recoding process sheds light on the peculiar shape of neoliberal ideology: competition and markets were redefined as discovery procedures, traditions were seen as receptacles of tacit knowledge, and institutions were conceived as the preconditions and results of dynamic evolutionary orders. The institutionalization of this fragmentary thought collective at the foundation of the Mont-Pèlerin Society in 1947 revealed both the novelty of this project and its immediate limits, in particular the tensions between its scientific ambition and its ideological projection. Key words: epistemology, Friedrich Hayek, history of science, ideology, Louis Rougier, Michael Polanyi, Mont-Pèlerin Society, neoliberalism, sociology of knowledge, Walter Lippmann iii CONTENTS RÉSUMÉ ................................................................................................................................................................... I ABSTRACT ............................................................................................................................................................... III CONTENTS ............................................................................................................................................................... V LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS .............................................................................................................................................. IX LIST OF ARCHIVAL COLLECTIONS ................................................................................................................................... XI ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ............................................................................................................................................. XIII INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................................. 1 Literature Review ........................................................................................................................................... 10 Method and sources used .............................................................................................................................. 22 Plan of the dissertation .................................................................................................................................. 29 CHAPTER 1. PLANNING SCIENCE ...................................................................................................................... 31 PART 1. A NEW VISION OF SCIENCE .................................................................................................................... 32 The 1931 London Congress ............................................................................................................................ 32 Boris Hessen’s paper ...................................................................................................................................... 37 Birth pangs of the social relations of science ................................................................................................. 39 PART 2. THE SOCIAL RELATIONS OF SCIENCE AND BERNALISM .......................................................................... 42 The politicization of British scientists ............................................................................................................. 42 Organization on the Left ................................................................................................................................ 46 The social relations of science movement ..................................................................................................... 50 PART 3. MICHAEL POLANYI: ANTITOTALITARIAN CHEMIST ............................................................................... 61 Clarity and opacity in a liberal economy.......................................................................................................
Recommended publications
  • Louis Rougier : Vie Et Œuvre D'un Philosophe Engagé
    Philosophia Scientiæ Travaux d'histoire et de philosophie des sciences CS 7 | 2007 Louis Rougier : vie et œuvre d'un philosophe engagé Louis Rougier : itinéraire intellectuel et politique, des années vingt à Nouvelle École Olivier Dard Édition électronique URL : http://journals.openedition.org/philosophiascientiae/429 DOI : 10.4000/philosophiascientiae.429 ISSN : 1775-4283 Éditeur Éditions Kimé Édition imprimée Date de publication : 1 janvier 2007 Pagination : 50-64 ISBN : 978-2-84174-412-1 ISSN : 1281-2463 Référence électronique Olivier Dard, « Louis Rougier : itinéraire intellectuel et politique, des années vingt à Nouvelle École », Philosophia Scientiæ [En ligne], CS 7 | 2007, mis en ligne le 08 juin 2011, consulté le 15 janvier 2021. URL : http://journals.openedition.org/philosophiascientiae/429 ; DOI : https://doi.org/10.4000/ philosophiascientiae.429 Tous droits réservés Louis Rougier : itinéraire intellectuel et politique, des années vingt à Nouvelle École Olivier Dard CRULH - Université Paul Verlaine - Metz Depuis sa mort, Louis Rougier (1889-1982) est largement oublié par le débat public et l’historiographie. Les libéraux en particulier, dont Rou- gier fut un des hérauts ne se sont guère réclamés de son héritage, à l’exception de Maurice Allais [Allais 1990]. La dimension sulfureuse at- tachée au personnage et liée à ses sympathies vichyssoises (qu’il faut remettre en perspective) comme à sa proximité avec la Nouvelle droite1 n’ont sans doute rien arrangé. C’est quoi qu’il en soit Alain de Benoist, fondateur et principal animateur de la Nouvelle droite et qui fut à la fois un intime et un disciple philosophique de Rougier au début des années 60 qui a perpétué le plus fidèlement son héritage en rééditant certains de ses livres avec des préfaces substantielles.2 Du côté de l’historiogra- phie, l’éclairage sur Rougier se limite à deux épisodes principaux : sa participation au néo-libéralisme de l’entre-deux-guerres et au colloque Philosophia Scientiæ, Cahier spécial 7, 2007, 50–64.
    [Show full text]
  • Michael Polanyi and Early Neoliberalism
    MICHAEL POLANYI AND EARLY NEOLIBERALISM Martin Beddeleem Keywords: Friedrich Hayek, Louis Rougier, Michael Polanyi, Mont-Pèlerin Society, neoliberalism, planning, Walter Lippmann ABSTRACT1 Between the late 1930s and the 1950s, Michael Polanyi came in close contact with a diverse cast of intellectuals seeking a renewal of the liberal doctrine. The elaboration of this “neoliberalism” happened through a transnational collaboration between economists, philosophers, and social theorists, united in their rejection of central planning. Defining a common agenda for this “early neoliberalism” offered an opportunity to discard the old laissez-faire doctrine and restore a supervisory role of the state. Ultimately, post-war dissensions regarding the direction of these efforts led Polanyi away from the neoliberal core. Between the publication of his pamphlet on the failures of economic planning in the Soviet Union in 1936 (CF, 61-95) and that of The Logic of Liberty in 1951, Michael Polanyi progressively lost interest in chemistry and started to investigate the political and sociological conditions necessary to scientific freedom and the pursuit of truth. During that time, he became involved with a group of scholars who, equally, perceived the democratic collapse of Europe as a wake-up call for a restatement of its liberal tradition. Whereas the values of individual dignity and social progress that liber- alism carried were needed then more than ever, they agreed that the method to achieve these ideals had become obsolete. Therefore, they focused their efforts on revamping a science of liberalism, which could answer the scientific claims of plannism and totalitar- ian ideologies. Tradition & Discovery: The Journal of the Polanyi Society 45:3 © 2019 by the Polanyi Society 31 For two decades, Michael Polanyi took part in the inception and the consolida- tion of “early neoliberalism” (Schulz-Forberg 2018; Beddeleem 2019), a period that predates the later development of neoliberalism from the 1960s onwards.
    [Show full text]
  • The Method of Antinomies: Oakeshott and Others Others and Oakeshott Antinomies: of Method the VOLUME 6 | ISSUE 1 + 2 2018 6 | ISSUE VOLUME
    University of South Florida Scholar Commons Philosophy Faculty Publications Philosophy 2018 The ethoM d of Antinomies: Oakeshott nda Others Stephen Turner University of South Florida, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarcommons.usf.edu/phi_facpub Scholar Commons Citation Turner, Stephen, "The eM thod of Antinomies: Oakeshott nda Others" (2018). Philosophy Faculty Publications. 309. https://scholarcommons.usf.edu/phi_facpub/309 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Philosophy at Scholar Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Philosophy Faculty Publications by an authorized administrator of Scholar Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. The Method of Antinomies: Oakeshott and Others STEPHEN TURNER Email: [email protected] Web: http://philosophy.usf.edu/faculty/sturner/ Abstract: Michael Oakeshott employed a device of argument and analysis that appears in a number of other thinkers, where it is given the name “antinomies.” These differ from binary oppositions or contradictories in that the two poles are bound to- gether. In this discussion, the nature of this binding is explored in detail, in large part in relation to Oakeshott’s own usages, such as his discussion of the relation of faith and skepticism, between collective goal-oriented associations and those based on contract, and between a legal regime based on neutral rules and one oriented to policy goals . Other examples might include Weber’s distinction between the politics of intention and the politics of responsibility. Moreover, such ambiguous concepts as “rights,” have antinomic interpretations. In each of these cases, the full realization of one ideal led, in practice, to consequenc- es associated with the other: in political practice, neither polar ideal was realizable without concessions to the other.
    [Show full text]
  • Robert Heineman: Authority and the Liberal Tradition: Study Guide
    Scholars Crossing Faculty Publications and Presentations Helms School of Government 2003 Robert Heineman: Authority and the Liberal Tradition: Study Guide Steven Alan Samson Liberty University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/gov_fac_pubs Part of the Other Social and Behavioral Sciences Commons, Political Science Commons, and the Public Affairs, Public Policy and Public Administration Commons Recommended Citation Samson, Steven Alan, "Robert Heineman: Authority and the Liberal Tradition: Study Guide" (2003). Faculty Publications and Presentations. 233. https://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/gov_fac_pubs/233 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Helms School of Government at Scholars Crossing. It has been accepted for inclusion in Faculty Publications and Presentations by an authorized administrator of Scholars Crossing. For more information, please contact [email protected]. ROBERT HEINEMAN: AUTHORITY AND THE LIBERAL TRADITION: STUDY GUIDE, 2001-2003 Steven Alan Samson Introduction Commentary and Study Questions The author's thesis may be summarized as follows: "Contemporary American liberalism is incapable of supporting for any sustained period of time a government that acts with firmness and coherent direction." Several implications are immediately drawn. Others may be inferred. Liberalism has promoted a "tremendous expansion of government within the past several decades," resulting in a "government lacking in authority and direction." One inference is that our political means (the sophisticated apparatus and process of government) outstrip the political ends (the substantive human purposes) they are supposed to serve. Remember Rushdoony's inescapable concepts]. Sometimes political programs are established for no better reason than that they can be.
    [Show full text]
  • La Nouvelle Droite, Ses Pompes Et Ses Œuvres D’Europe Action (1963) À La NRH (2002)
    La Nouvelle Droite, ses pompes et ses œuvres D’Europe Action (1963) à la NRH (2002) par Geoffroy Daubuis Après avoir bénéficié d’une forte publicité dans les années 1978- 1985, la mouvance néopaïenne dite « Nouvelle Droite » peut sembler aujourd’hui passée de mode. En réalité, son influence perdure, tant dans les milieux universitaires que dans les milieux nationalistes. Depuis une dizaine d’années, c’est principalement par les publica- tions d’histoire que la Nouvelle Droite atteint le grand public. Geoffroy Daubuis présente ici un historique de cette mouvance, en trois de ses aspects : I. La revue Europe Action, qui est à l’origine de la Nouvelle Droite. II. Le GRECE, qui en est le noyau dur depuis 1968. III. La NRH (Nouvelle Revue d’Histoire) qui assure depuis 2002 une diffusion « douce » de ses idées. Le Sel de la terre. — I — A l’origine de la Nouvelle Droite : Europe Action A GÉNÉRATION SPONTANÉE n’existe pas plus dans l’ordre intellec- tuel que dans l’ordre physique, et l’on pourrait remonter fort loin pour L établir la généalogie de la Nouvelle Droite. Peut-être faudrait-il revenir à Celse et Porphyre, les polémistes païens de l’Antiquité, dont les attaques anti- chrétiennes préfigurent toutes celles qui viendront par la suite 1. Nous nous contenterons ici de remonter à la fondation d’Europe Action, en 1962-1963, dont les meneurs (Dominique Venner, Alain de Benoist 2, Jean Mabire, 1 — Sur Celse et Porphyre, voir le maître-ouvrage de Pierre DE LABRIOLLE, La Réaction païenne, étude sur la polémique antichrétienne du Ier au VIe siècle, Paris, Cerf, 2005.
    [Show full text]
  • "The New Non-Science of Politics: on Turns to History in Polltical Sciencen
    "The New Non-Science of Politics: On Turns to History in Polltical Sciencen Rogers Smith CSST Working CRSO Working Paper #59 Paper #449 October 1990 The New Non-Science of Politics : On Turns to Historv in Political Science Prepared for the CSST Conference on "The Historic Turn in the Human Sciences" Oct. 5-7, 1990 Ann Arbor, Michigan Rogers M. Smith Department of Political Science Yale University August, 1990 The New Non-Science of Po1itic.s Rogers M. Smit-h Yale University I. Introducticn. The canon of major writings on politics includes a considerable number that claim to offer a new science of politics, or a new science of man that encompasses politics. Arlc,totle, Hobbos, Hume, Publius, Con~te,Bentham, Hegel, Marx, Spencer, Burgess, Bentley, Truman, East.on, and Riker are amongst the many who have clairr,ed, more or less directly, that they arc founding or helping to found a true palitical science for the first tlme; and the rccent writcrs lean heavily on the tcrni "science. "1 Yet very recently, sorno of us assigned the title "political scien:iSt" havc been ti-il-ning returning to act.ivities that many political scientist.^, among others, regard as unscientific--to the study of instituti~ns, usually in historical perspective, and to historica! ~a'lternsand processes more broadly. Some excellent scholars belie-ve this turn is a disast.er. It has been t.ernlod a "grab bag of diverse, often conf!icting approaches" that does not offer anything iike a scientific theory (~kubband Moe, 1990, p. 565) .2 In this essay I will argue that the turn or return t.o institutions and history is a reasonable response to two linked sets of probicms.
    [Show full text]
  • Switching Gestalts on Gestalt Psychology: on the Relation Between Science and Philosophy
    Switching Gestalts on Gestalt Psychology: On the Relation between Science and Philosophy Jordi Cat Indiana University The distinction between science and philosophy plays a central role in meth- odological, programmatic and institutional debates. Discussions of disciplin- ary identities typically focus on boundaries or else on genealogies, yielding models of demarcation and models of dynamics. Considerations of a disci- pline’s self-image, often based on history, often plays an important role in the values, projects and practices of its members. Recent focus on the dynamics of scientiªc change supplements Kuhnian neat model with a role for philoso- phy and yields a model of the evolution of philosophy of science. This view il- luminates important aspects of science and itself contributes to philosophy of science. This interactive model is general yet based on exclusive attention to physics. In this paper and two sequels, I focus on the human sciences and ar- gue that their role in the history of philosophy of science is just as important and it also involves a close involvement of the history of philosophy. The focus is on Gestalt psychology and it points to some lessons for philosophy of science. But, unlike the discussion of natural sciences, the discussion here brings out more complication than explication, and skews certain kinds of generaliza- tions. 1. How Do Science and Philosophy Relate to Each Other? a) As Nietzsche put it in the Genealogy of Morals: “Only that which has no history can be deªned.” This notion should make us wary of Heideggerian etymology, conceptual analysis and even Michael Friedman’s relativized, dialectical, post-Kuhnian Hegelianism alike.
    [Show full text]
  • Crises of Modernity’ Discourses and the Rise of Financial Technologies in a Contested Mechanized World
    Philos. Technol. DOI 10.1007/s13347-017-0255-5 RESEARCH ARTICLE Open Access ‘Crises of Modernity’ Discourses and the Rise of Financial Technologies in a Contested Mechanized World Marinus Ossewaarde1 Received: 29 April 2016 /Accepted: 26 February 2017 # The Author(s) 2017. This article is published with open access at Springerlink.com Abstract The aim of this article is to provide a discussion of scholarly ‘crisis of modernity’ discourses that have developed in the field of social philosophy. Re- visiting past and present discourses can be illuminating in at least three ways: it can reveal the broader picture of the present financialized and technologized world and the rise of financial technologies; it can provide scholars with new vocabularies, concepts, and metaphors to comprehend present-day phenomena and developments; and it can reveal the variety of commitments that are possible, today, too. This article starts with a discussion of the original ‘crisis of modernity’ discourses (avant la lettre), in which the clashing arguments of Comte and Tocqueville are featured, and a discussion of a second ‘crisis of modernity’ that developed in the context of the ‘Great Depression.’ Athird‘crisis of modernity’ discourse emerged in the wake of the financial crises of the 1970s. Such crises are still ongoing and discussed within the boundaries of the third ‘crisis of modernity’ discourse. How financial technologies do and do not fit within this third discourse is discussed in the remainder of this article. Keywords Crisis . Democracy. Financialization . Financial technologies . Ideology. Mechanization modernity discourses 1 Introduction In discourses on the ‘crises of modernity’ during the past two centuries, technology is an important theme for philosophical reflection.
    [Show full text]
  • Natural Law in the Modern European Constitutions Gottfried Dietze
    Notre Dame Law School NDLScholarship Natural Law Forum 1-1-1956 Natural Law in the Modern European Constitutions Gottfried Dietze Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarship.law.nd.edu/nd_naturallaw_forum Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Dietze, Gottfried, "Natural Law in the Modern European Constitutions" (1956). Natural Law Forum. Paper 7. http://scholarship.law.nd.edu/nd_naturallaw_forum/7 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by NDLScholarship. It has been accepted for inclusion in Natural Law Forum by an authorized administrator of NDLScholarship. For more information, please contact [email protected]. NATURAL LAW IN THE MODERN EUROPEAN CONSTITUTIONS Gottfried Dietze THE SECOND WORLD WAR has brought about one of the most fundamental revolutions in modem European history. Unlike its predecessors of 1640, 1789, and 1917, the revolution of 1945 was not confined to one country. Its ideas did not gradually find their way into the well-established and stable orders of other societies. It was a spontaneous movement in the greater part of a continent that had traditionally been torn by dissension; and its impact was immediately felt by a society which was in a state of dissolution and despair. The revolution of 1945 had a truly European character. There was no uprising of a lower nobility as in 1640; of a third estate as in the French Revolution; of the proletariat as in Russia. Since fascism had derived support from all social strata and preached the solidarity of all citizens of the nation, there could hardly be room for a class struggle.
    [Show full text]
  • Nine Lives of Neoliberalism
    A Service of Leibniz-Informationszentrum econstor Wirtschaft Leibniz Information Centre Make Your Publications Visible. zbw for Economics Plehwe, Dieter (Ed.); Slobodian, Quinn (Ed.); Mirowski, Philip (Ed.) Book — Published Version Nine Lives of Neoliberalism Provided in Cooperation with: WZB Berlin Social Science Center Suggested Citation: Plehwe, Dieter (Ed.); Slobodian, Quinn (Ed.); Mirowski, Philip (Ed.) (2020) : Nine Lives of Neoliberalism, ISBN 978-1-78873-255-0, Verso, London, New York, NY, https://www.versobooks.com/books/3075-nine-lives-of-neoliberalism This Version is available at: http://hdl.handle.net/10419/215796 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Terms of use: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. personal and scholarly purposes. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle You are not to copy documents for public or commercial Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen. publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public. Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, If the documents have been made available under an Open gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort Content Licence (especially Creative
    [Show full text]
  • Louis Rougier (1889-1982)1
    Vie et œuvre d’un rationaliste engagé : Louis Rougier (1889-1982)1 Claudia Berndt Universität Friedrich-Schiller, Jena & Mathieu Marion Université du Québec à Montréal À Kevin Mulligan J’ai souvent songé que le propre du clerc dans l’âge moderne est de prêcher dans le désert. Je crois que j’y suis passé maître. Julien Benda Faute de savoir dans quelle catégorie vous classer, on ne vous inscrit dans aucune. Louis Rougier Si l’ignorance et les préjugés à l’égard de la philosophie analytique ont de moins en moins cours dans la philosophie de langue française, l’œuvre de Louis Rougier, seul représentant français de l’empirisme lo- gique2 et, à ce titre, un des pères de la philosophie analytique de langue française, reste encore peu connue. Rougier n’est pourtant pas totalement 1Ce texte reprend, complète et corrige sur plusieurs points le contenu de [Ma- rion 2004]. Il est aussi le fruit des recherches de Claudia Berndt en vue d’une thèse de doctorat à l’Université d’Iéna et à l’Institut d’Histoire du Temps Présent. Ce texte reflète l’état de nos connaissances sans prétendre à l’exhaustivité. Les auteurs voudraient remercier pour leur aide Michel Bourdeau, Vicki Caron, Benoît Castel- nérac, Steven Davis, Pascal Engel, Béatrice Fink, Gerhard Heinzmann, Jan Lacki, Thierry Leterre, Philippe Nabonnand, Lutz Niethammer, Jean-Claude Pont, Jacques Rougier† et son épouse, Henry Rousso, Frédérick Tremblay, ainsi que la Fondation du Château de Lourmarin pour avoir facilité nos séjours. Claudia Berndt remercie en outre cette Fondation et l’Institut Historique Allemand de Paris pour leur aide financière.
    [Show full text]
  • MIND and COSMOS INTRODUCTION '/F
    Chapter 1 Introduction The aim of this book is to argue that the mind-bodyjprobtem is not — just a local problem, having to do with the relation between mind, brain, and behavior in living animal organisms, but that it invades our understanding of the entire cosmos and its history. The physical sciences and evolutionary biology cannot be kept insulated from it, and I believe a true appreciation of the difficulty of the problem must eventually change our conception of the place of the physical £} sciences in describing the natural order. One of the legitimate tasks of philosophy is to investigate the limits of even the best developed and most successful forms of con­ temporary scientific knowledge. It maybe frustrating to acknowledge, but we are simply at the point in the history of human thought at ^\fi4^A/ which we find ourselves, and our successors will make discoveries and develop forms of understanding of which we have not dreamt. Humans are addicted to the hope for a final reckoning, but intellec­ tual humility requires that we resist the temptation to assume that tools of the kind we now have are in principle sufficient to under­ stand the universe as a whole. Pointing out their limits is a philo- <&£-• sophical task, whoever engages in it, rather than part of the internal pursuit of science—though we can hope that if the limits are recog­ nized, that may eventually lead to the discovery of new forms of ; scientific understanding. Scientists are well aware of how much they 1 Sf MIND AND COSMOS INTRODUCTION '/f don't know, but this is a different kind of problem—not just of evidence favors some form of neutral monism over the traditional acknowledging the limits of what is actually understood but of alternatives of materialism, idealism, and dualism.
    [Show full text]