According to the age-of-acquisition hypothesis, words acquired early in life are processed faster and more accurately than words acquired later. Connectionist models have begun to explore the influence of the age/order of acquisition of items (and also their frequency of encounter). This study attempts to reconcile two different methodological and theoretical approaches (proposed by Lambon Ralph & Ehsan, 2006 and Zevin & Seidenberg, 2002) to age-limited learning effects. The current simulations extend the findings reported by Zevin and Seidenberg (2002) that (...) have shown that frequency trajectories (FTs) have limited and specific effects on word-reading tasks. Using the methodological framework proposed by Lambon Ralph and Ehsan (2006), which makes it possible to compare word-reading and picture-naming tasks in connectionist networks, we were able to show that FT has a considerable influence on age-limited learning effects in a picture naming task. The findings show that when the input–output mappings are arbitrary (simulating picture naming tasks), the links formed by the network become entrenched as a result of early experience and that subsequent variations in frequency of exposure of the items have only a minor impact. In contrast, when the mappings between input-output are quasi-systematic or systematic (simulating word-reading tasks), the training of new items was generalized and resulted in the suppression of age-limited learning effects. At a theoretical level, we suggest that FT, which simultaneously takes account of time and the level of exposure across time, represents a more precise and modulated measure compared with the order of introduction of the items and may lead to innovative hypotheses in the field of age-limited learning effects. (shrink)

A translation of one of the single most important works of recent French philosophy, Badiou's magnum opus, and a must-have for his growing following and anyone interested in contemporary Continental thought.

Infinite Thought brings together a representative selection of the range of Alain Badiou's work, illustrating the power and diversity of his thought.

The subtractive : preface by Francois Wahl -- Philosophy itself -- The (re)turn of philosophy itself -- Definition of philosophy -- What is a philosophical institution? -- Philosophy and poetry -- The philosophical recourse to the poem -- Mallarm's method : subtraction and isolation -- Rimbaud's method : interruption -- Philosophy and mathematics -- Conference on subtraction -- Truth : forcing and unnameable -- Philosophy and politics -- Philosophy and love -- What is love? -- Philosophy and psychoanalysis -- Subject (...) and infinite -- Antiphilosophy : Lacan and Plato -- Writing of the generic -- Writing of the generic : Samuel beckett. (shrink)

Didacticism, romanticism, and classicism are the possible schemata for the knotting of art and philosophy, the third term in this knot being the education of subjects, youth in particular. What characterizes the century that has just come to a close is that, while it underwent the saturation of these three schemata, it failed to introduce a new one. Today, this predicament tends to produce a kind of unknotting of terms, a desperate dis-relation between art and philosophy, together with the pure (...) and simple collapse of what circulated between them: the theme of education. Whence the thesis of which this book is nothing but a series of variations: faced with such a situation of saturation and closure, we must attempt to propose a new schema, a fourth type of knot between philosophy and art. Among these “inaesthetic” variations, the reader will encounter a sustained debate with contemporary philosophical uses of the poem, bold articulations of the specificity and prospects of theater, cinema, and dance, along with subtle and provocative readings of Fernando Pessoa, Ste;phane Mallarme;, and Samuel Beckett. (shrink)

In this book a noted physiologist and neuroscientist introduces the concept of simplexity, the set of solutions living organisms find that enable them to deal with information and situations, while taking into account past experiences and anticipating future ones. Such solutions are new ways of addressing problems so that actions may be taken more quickly, more elegantly, and more efficiently. In a sense, the history of living organisms may be summed up by their remarkable ability to find solutions that avoid (...) the world's complexity by imposing on it their own rules and functions. Evolution has resolved the problem of complexity not by simplifying but by finding solutions whose processes--though they can sometimes be complex--allow us to act in the midst of complexity and of uncertainty. Nature can inspire us by making us realize that simplification is never simple and requires instead that we choose, refuse, connect, and imagine, in order to act in the best possible manner. Such solutions are already being applied in design and engineering and are significant in biology, medicine, economics, and the behavioral sciences. (shrink)

Two controversial thinkers discuss a timeless but nonetheless urgent question: should philosophy interfere in the world? Nothing less than philosophy is at stake because, according to Badiou, philosophy is nothing but interference and commitment and will not be restrained by academic discipline. Philosophy is strange and new, and yet speaks in the name of all - as Badiou shows with his theory of universality. Similarly, Zizek believes that the philosopher must intervene, contrary to all expectations, in the key issues of (...) the time. He can offer no direction, but this only shows that the question has been posed incorrectly: it is valid to change the terms of the debate and settle on philosophy as abnormality and excess. At once an invitation to philosophy and an introduction to the thinking of two of the most topical and controversial philosophers writing today, this concise volume will be of great interest to students and general readers alike. (shrink)

Plato's _Republic_ is one of the best-known and most widely-discussed texts in the history of philosophy. But how might we get to the heart of this work today, 2,500 years after its original composition? Alain Badiou breathes life into Plato's landmark text and revives its universality. Rather than producing yet another critical commentary, he has instead worked closely on the original Greek and, through spectacular changes, adapted it to our times. In this innovative reimagining of Plato's work, Badiou has (...) removed all references specific to ancient Greek society--from lengthy exchanges about moral courage in archaic poetry to political considerations mainly of interest to the aristocratic elite--and has expanded the range of cultural references. Here, philosophy is firing on all cylinders: Socrates and his companions are joined by Beckett, Pessoa, Freud, and Hegel, among others. Together these thinkers demonstrate that true philosophy endures, ready to absorb new horizons without changing its essence. Moreover, Badiou--who is also a dramatist--has transformed the Socratic dialogue into a genuine oratorial contest. In his version of the _Republic_, the interlocutors do much more than simply agree with Socrates. They argue, stand up to him, put him on the spot, and show thought in motion. In this work of dramatic scholarship and philosophy, we encounter a modern version of Plato's text that is alive, stimulating, and directly relevant to our own world. (shrink)

Martin Heidegger was an ordinary Nazi and a loyal member of the provincial petty bourgeoisie. He was also a seminal thinker of the Continental tradition and one of the twentieth century's most important philosophers. How are we to make sense of this dual life? Should we factor Heidegger's domestic and political associations into our understanding of his thought, or should we treat his intellectual work independently of his abhorrent politics? How does any thinker reconcile the mundane with the ideal or (...) the pursuit of philosophical inquiry with the demands of civic engagement? In Heidegger, Alain Badiou and Barbara Cassin immerse themselves in the philosopher's correspondence with his wife Elfride to answer these questions as they relate to Heidegger and all thinkers vulnerable to the politics of their times. They focus on Heidegger's tormented relationship with his wife, with Hannah Arendt, and with numerous other women, bringing an unusual level of intimacy to his personal and intellectual worlds. (shrink)

In this dialogue, Alain Badiou shares the clearest, most detailed account to date of his profound indebtedness to Lacanian psychoanalysis. He explains in depth the tools Lacan gave him to navigate the extremes of his other two philosophical "masters," Jean-Paul Sartre and Louis Althusser. Élisabeth Roudinesco supplements Badiou's experience with her own perspective on the troubled landscape of the French analytic world since Lacan's death--critiquing, for example, the link (or lack thereof) between politics and psychoanalysis in Lacan's work. Their (...) exchange reinvigorates how the the work of a pivotal twentieth-century thinker is perceived. (shrink)

Two eminent French philosophers discuss German philosophy—including the legacy of Kant, Hegel, Nietzsche, Adorno, Fichte, Marx, and Heidegger—from a French perspective. In this book, Alain Badiou and Jean-Luc Nancy, the two most important living philosophers in France, discuss German philosophy from a French perspective. Written in the form of a dialogue, and revised and expanded from a 2016 conversation between the two philosophers at the Universität der Künste Berlin, the book offers not only Badiou's and Nancy's reinterpretations of German (...) philosophers and philosophical concepts, but also an accessible introduction to the greatest thinkers of German philosophy. Badiou and Nancy discuss and debate such topics as the legacies of Kant, Hegel, and Marx, as well as Nietzsche, Adorno, Fichte, Schelling, and the unavoidable problem of Heidegger and Nazism. The dialogue is contentious, friendly, and often quotable, with strong—at times passionate—positions taken by both Badiou and Nancy, who find themselves disagreeing over Kant, for example, and in unexpected agreement on Marx, for another. What does it mean, then, to conduct a dialogue on German philosophy from a French perspective? As volume editor Jan Völker observes, “German philosophy” and “French philosophy” describe complex constellations that, despite the reference to nation-states and languages, above all encompass shared concepts and problems—although these take a range of forms. Perhaps they can reveal their essential import only in translation. (shrink)

The shift in Foucault’s work from genealogy to ethics finds consensus among Foucault scholars. However, the motivations behind this transition remain either misunderstood or understudied in large part. Foucault’s recently published or soon-to-be translated 1977/—9 lectures (published as Security, Territory, Population and as The Birth of Biopolitics) offer new elements for understanding this dense and uncharted period along Foucault’s itinerary. In this article, the author argues that Foucault’s interpretation of the liberal tradition, which is at the core of the 1977—9 (...) lectures, must be examined in combination with Foucault’s other major interests in the late 1970s, namely the Iranian Revolution and Kant. The discovery of spirituality (Iran), the valorization of an autonomous subject (Kant) and the call for a tolerant environment towards minority practices (liberalism) pave the way for the later Foucault’s ethics, which are grounded in spiritual exercises and means of liberating the subject. (shrink)

In Mathematics of the Transcendental, Alain Badiou painstakingly works through the pertinent aspects of Category Theory, demonstrating their internal logic and veracity, their derivation and distinction from Set Theory, and the 'thinking of being'. In doing so he sets out the basic onto-logical requirements of his greater and transcendental logics as articulated in his magnum opus, Logics of Worlds. This important book combines both his elaboration of the disjunctive synthesis between ontology and onto-logy (the discourses of being as such (...) and being-appearing) from the perspective of Category Theory and the categorial basis of his philosophical conception of 'being there'. Hitherto unpublished in either French or English, Mathematics of the Transcendental provides Badiou's readers with a much-needed complete elaboration of his understanding and use of Category Theory. The book is an essential aid to understanding the mathematical and logical basis of his theory of appearing as elaborated in Logics of Worlds and other works and is essential reading for his many followers. (shrink)

Alain Deligne est philosophe et Professeur émérite de littérature française à l'Université de Münster (Allemagne). Ses travaux portent sur l'idéalisme allemand (Schopenhauer, Schleiermacher), sur la traduction, la littérature ainsi que sur l'image. Il est coéditeur de catalogues sur la caricature ainsi que de la revue Ridiculosa et l'auteur de la première monographie française sur C. G. Carus (La Terre qui vit - Peinture et savoirs, 2003), et de la première monographie allemande sur Weil (Ein zeitgenôssischer Philosoph, 1998). Du jeune (...) Éric Weil, recommandé par Albert Einstein à Ernst Cassirer, on connaissait son doctorat sur Pomponazzi (1932), son essai sur Plotin et Ficin (1933) et son grand article sur l'intérêt pris à l'histoire (1935). Mais nous ignorions tout d'autres écrits précédents ou contemporains. Grâce au travail d'édition bilingue d'Alain Deligne, nous avons maintenant accès à ses exposés d'étudiant, conférences, articles, interventions radiophoniques ou ses travaux en vue de futures études (1922-1936). Nous pouvons ainsi mieux saisir ce qu'Éric Weil allait devenir : le fondateur d'un système ouvert de compréhension (Logique de la philosophie, 1950) et rester : un philosophe curieux de toutes les formes de savoir. À cette fin, il fallait, sur la base d'archives, restituer ses multiples intérêts en philosophie, sciences, histoire de l'art, germanistique, Renaissance italienne et occultisme. Sa pensée plonge ses racines dans les débats politiques de la République de Weimar pré-hitlérienne. Depuis l'exil parisien de 1933, Éric Weil en affrontera toute la violence."--Page 4 of cover. (shrink)

A double ambiguity has been charged against Rawls’s difference principle (DP). Is it Maximin, Leximin, or something else? Usually, following A. Sen, scholars identify DP with the so-called Leximin. One argues here that one has to distinguish 1° the Leximin, 2° the Maximin (as rule of justice formally analogous to the maximin rule of decision), represented by the figure in L of the perfectly substitutable goods, and 3° the genuine DP. When the augmentation of inequality benefits the worse off, only (...) Pareto-strong improvements are permitted. Leximin would also permit Pareto-weak improvements too (after the first maximum D), where only the richest improves: from (2, 3) to (2, 5), say. This is forbidden by DP. With two classes, unlike Maximin, DP has no curve of indifference and is always decisive, as Leximin is. For undecisive Rules of Justice, which admit indifferent curves, I propose to add a lexically secondary rule, to break ties. That move is able to clarify the links and the differences between on the one hand Maximin alone, with its typical indifference curves in L, and on the other hand, the DP properly understood and the Leximin, which both have no indifferent curves. With two classes of persons (best off/worse off), DP appears more egalitarian than Leximin, because it's secondary rule is MinIn (Minimization of Inequality). But the intuition behind the distinction is that it cannot possible “fair” that only the best off improves in a productive social cooperation. (shrink)

Deux programmes sont compris sous l’expression d’« épistémologie évolutionniste», dont Popper fut l’un des promoteurs : un programme « littéral», qui consisterait à rendre compte de la connaissance en termes d’adaptation darwinienne, et un programme « analogique», qui ferait fond sur une comparaison entre progrès scientifique et évolution du vivant. Quine est crédité du programme « fort» : la « naturalisation» de l’épistémologie. Popper est supposé être le responsable du « programme faible». Pourquoi donc s’inspirer d’une telle analogie pour penser (...) quelque chose d’aussi sophistiqué que la « croissance de la connaissance scientifique »? Une telle analogie peut avoir une valeur heuristique, mais les différences entre la science et l’évolution sont tellement évidentes qu’elle montre vite ses limites. Mais la philosophie poppérienne de l’évolution ne se réduit pas à une analogie. (shrink)

Alors que le plupart des commentateurs s'accorde pour affirmer que le Traité Théologico-Politique est un plaidoyer pour la tolérance, curieusement on ne trouvera pratiquement jamais le mot sous la plume de son auteur. Comme si Spinoza, qui le connaissait, l'écartait volontairement de son lexique philosophique. La présente étude s'efforce de mettre à jour les raisons de cette absence.

Entre les états (2, 3) et (2, 4), le Principe de Différence (PD) choisit-t-il le premier, le second, ou est-il indifférent? Cette dernière interprétation est confortée par le choix par Rawls des courbes en L pour illustrer le PD (Rawls 1999 [1971], § 13, fig. 5), formellement analogue au Maximin en théorie de la décision, et qui admettrait des courbes d’indifférence ; une fois le plus mal loti maximisé, on est indifférent entre les états des mieux lotis ; le Leximin (...) enjoint lui de choisir le second état, puisqu’il réitère le PD sur le dernier plus mal loti. La plupart des commentateurs choisissent le Leximin ; or ce principe est inégalitaire, car il peut laisser s’enrichir les riches alors que les pauvres stagnent. Le PD sélectionne en fait le premier état. Si l’on peut passer du premier état au second, on doit pouvoir passer du premier à un état (2+n, 3-n). Le PD est univoque, différent du Maximin et du Leximin, qui peut favoriser des sociétés duales, où seuls les riches s’enrichissent. On n’a pu généraliser le résultat à plus de deux classes, même en tenant compte de la « connexion en chaîne », laquelle exprime l’idée fondamentale de Rawls : la solidarité via la coopération.Code JEL : I13. (shrink)

Karl Popper a toujours exprimé une grande admiration à l'égard de l'Allgemeine Erkenntnislehre de Moritz Schlick. En revanche, les positions adoptées par Schlick au cours de son séjour à Vienne ont surtout suscité la critique de l'auteur de la Logique de la découverte scientifique. Le désaccord porte sur la réduction schlickienne de la valeur des théories à des instruments de prédiction, sur la portée du Tractatus de Wittgenstein, sur la théorie du sens et sur la vérité. Popper, dès 1931, refuse (...) absolument le positivisme anti-métaphysique, le « tournant » linguistique et le « principe de vérification ». Le débat sur la base empirique au sein du Wiener Kreis à partir de 1931 est complexe, et l'intervention de Popper comme celle de Schlick sont cruciales. On tente ici d?en faire très rapidement un historique précis. (shrink)

There is little doubt that animals are ―conscious‖. Animals hunt prey, escape predators, explore new environments, eat, mate, learn, feel, and so forth. If one defines consciousness as being aware of external events and experiencing mental states such as sensations and emotions (Natsoulas, 1978), then gorillas, dogs, bears, horses, pigs, pheasants, cats, rabbits, snakes, magpies, wolves, elephants, and lions, to name a few creatures, clearly qualify. The contentious issue rather is: Do these animals know that they are perceiving an external (...) environment and experiencing internal events? Are animals self-conscious? Recent attempts at understanding animal consciousness (e.g., Edelman & Seth, 2009) agree that non-human animals most probably possess ―primary‖ (or ―minimal‖) consciousness. But these views also argue that unlike humans animals lack many (but not all) elements that make up higher-order consciousness—the capacity to self-reflect on the contents of primary consciousness. In this chapter I will aim at offering a more elaborate picture of this position. I will present detailed information on what is meant by ―higher-order consciousness‖—i.e., selfawareness. I will suggest that some dimensions of self-awareness (e.g., self-recognition, metacognition, mental time travel) may be observed in several animals, but that numerous additional aspects (e.g., self-rumination, emotion awareness) seem to be absent. Some other self-related processes, such as Theory-of Mind, have been identified in animals, but not as the full-fledged versions found in humans. I will postulate that these differences in levels of selfawareness between humans and animals may be attributable to one distinctive feature of human experience: the ability to engage in inner speech. (shrink)

Since at least as far back as the seventeenth century, the “Quarrel Between the Ancients and the Moderns” has figured on the philosopher’s agenda, in aesthetics and in natural philosophy as well as in ethics and in politics. In this last field, one of the most important stakes of the quarrel turns on the distinction which Benjamin Constant drew in 1819, between two different conceptions of liberty: that of the Ancients and that of the Moderns. The problem of freedom lies (...) at the very heart of all philosophical reflection: in metaphysics and in theology, as well as in ethics and in social and political philosophy. Being founded on a very strong affirmation of the preeminent value of individual freedom, liberalism has, for at least two centuries, been at the centre of the discussion both in modern political philosophy and in economics. Not only were its first rivals, namely anarchism, socialism and a reactionary mode of thought together with its nostalgia for a hierarchical society, defined against the background of liberalism; but the internal discussions within liberalism itself have not been any the less intense, as is realized when comparing its “solidarist” with its “proprietarist” or “libertarian” versions. Some liberals claim descent from Burke, others from Condorcet, some from Humboldt and others from the early Fichte. Liberalism can indeed be spelt out in different ways. One can anyway perceive in present-day objections to liberalism the reappearance of a good many classical philosophical theses. Thus the communitarian criticism of abstract universalism and of state neutrality reminds one of the Hegelian and romantic criticism of the Enlightenment; while some arguments advanced by “leftist” communitarians recall the Marxist criticisms aimed at the formal idealism inherent in the Declaration of the Rights of Man. (shrink)

The fall of the Berlin wall was seen by many as the final triumph of liberal democracy over communism. But now, in the wake of the great financial crisis of 2008 and its aftermath, things look a little different. New questions are arising about capitalism and democracy, new social movements are challenging established institutions and new political possibilities are emerging. Is democracy an inevitable hostage of capitalism, or can it reinvent itself to meet the challenge of globalization? In an exclusive, (...) previously unpublished dialogue, Alain Badiou, a key figure of the radical left and a leading advocate of the communist idea, and Marcel Gauchet, a major exponent of anti-totalitarianism and a champion of liberal democracy, confront one another. Together, they take stock of history, interrogate one another s views and defend their respective projects: on the one side, the revival of the communist hypothesis, and on the other, the radical reform of a contested democratic model. (shrink)

Everything in their respective positions divides them: Alain Badiou is the thinker of a revitalized communism and Alain Finkielkraut the mournful observer of the loss of values. The two opponents, gathered here for their first-ever debate, have irreconcilable visions. Yet neither is a stranger to controversy, and in this debate they make explicit the grounds of their personal dispute as well as addressing, in a frank and open exchange, their ideas and theories. Guided by Aude Lancelin, the two (...) philosophers discuss subjects as diverse as national identity, Israel and Judaism, May 1968, and renewed popularity of the idea of communism. Their passionate debate is more than just the sum total of their disagreements, however, for neither of them is satisfied with the state of our society or the direction in which its political representatives persist in taking it. They agree that there needs to be change and their confrontation in this volume shows the importance of asking difficult questions, not only of each other, but also of our political systems. (shrink)

In this collection of essays, Alain Badiou revisits the age-old problem of the relation between literature and philosophy, arguing against both Plato and Heidegger's famous arguments. Philosophy neither has to ban the poets from the republic nor abdicate its own powers to the sole benefit of poetry or art. Instead, it must declare the end of what Badiou names the "age of the poets," from Holderlin to Celan. Drawing on ideas from his first publication on the subject, "The Autonomy (...) of the Aesthetic Process," Badiou also offers an illuminating set of readings of contemporary French prose writers, giving us fascinating insights into the theory of the novel while also accounting for the specific position of literature between science and ideology. (shrink)

Probing semantic relations Exploration and identification in specialized texts Alain Auger and Caroline Barrière In recent years, several scientific ...

Faut-il accepter comme une loi de la raison que le réel exige en toutes circonstances une soumission plutôt qu une invention? Le réel est toujours ce qui se découvre au prix que le semblant qui nous subjugue soit arraché. Aujourd hui, nous devons être convaincus qu'en dépit des deuils que la pensée nous impose, chercher ce qu'il y a de réel dans le réel peut être, est, une passion joyeuse. Professeur émérite à l École normale supérieure, Alain Badiou est (...) philosophe, dramaturge et romancier. 4e de couverture. (shrink)

Philosophy and history (with Jean Hyppolite) -- Philosophy and science (with Georges Canguilhem) -- Philosophy and sociology (with Raymond Aron) -- Philosophy and psychology (with Michel Foucault) -- Philosophy and language (with Paul Ricœur) -- Philosophy and truth (with Jean Hyppolite, Georges Canguilhem, Raymond Aron, Michel Foucault, Paul Ricœur, Alain Badiou and Dina Dreyfus) -- Philosophy and ethics (with Michel Henry) -- Model and structure (with Michel Serres) -- Teaching philosophy through television (with excerpts from Jean Hyppolite, Georges Canguilhem, (...) Raymond Aron, Michel Foucault and Paul Ricœur. Alain Badiou by telephone and Dina Dreyfus in the studio). (shrink)

Ils sont issus de la même génération. Ils ont tous les deux traversés les années rouges à la fin des années 1960. Alain Badiou est né en 1937 à Rabat, Jean-Claude Milner en 1941 à Paris. Mais s'ils furent l’un et l’autre maoïstes, le premier fixait toute son attention vers la Chine quand l’autre s’en détournait déjà. Cette polémique originaire sur le destin du gauchisme s’est nourrie de nouvelles et profondes divergences à propos du rôle de la philosophie et (...) de la politique au fil des années. La controverse oppose deux grands penseurs que tout rapproche et que tout éloigne. Qu’ils évoquent l’ère des révolutions, et en particulier la Commune et la Révolution culturelle chinoise ; qu’ils se penchent sur les grands massacres de l’Histoire ; qu’ils discutent de l’infini, de l’universel, du nom Juif, de l’antisémitisme, de la violence, du rôle des intellectuels, du progrès, du capitalisme, de la gauche, de l’Europe. Le scepticisme bon teint de Jean-Claude Milner se heurte constamment à la passion doctrinale d’Alain Badiou. L’amoureux de Lucrèce se frotte à la cuirasse de l’héritier de Platon. Les arguments minimalistes de Jean-Claude Milner croisent les propositions maximalistes d’Alain Badiou. Et ce débat hors normes débouche finalement sur de nouvelles interrogations. Car il n’est de meilleur remède à la puissance écrasante de la raison médiatique que la reviviscence des grandes disputes de l’esprit. (shrink)

Dans ce livre, la philosophie n'est pas présentée essentiellement comme doctrine ou comme système, mais comme transmission, mouvement, école. Le philosophe n'est pas un solitaire, il est inséparable de ses élèves, de ses disciples, de ses adversaires. Il ne parvient qu'en fin de course aux formes écrites et stables de son œuvre. On a donc finalement affaire plus à un théâtre qu'à un traité, plus à des dialogues qu'à des monologues, plus à un cours qu'à un livre. Le modèle évident (...) est le Socrate de Platon, qui a su assurer, en fondant la philosophie comme discipline, qu'elle devait s'établir n'importe où dans le multiple du monde. Éloge, oui, de la philosophie comme création publique d'une pensée qui, s'inventant et se transportant n'importe où, parlant à n'importe qui d'un n'importe quoi retravaillé, invente la théâtralisation de l'être, en tant qu'être." A.B. Quelle philosophie pour le siècle qui vient? Faux dialogue platonicien, qui met en scène le 'parleur' Tocéras aux prises avec des interlocuteurs issus de pays et de cultures philosophiques différents - le Britannique John After, la Grecque Amantha, le Sénégalais B'adj Akil, le Chinois Xi La Pong, et d'autres encore -, cet éloge déroule les fils d'une histoire de la pensée revisitée dans un jeu de formes inventif et libérateur, à la lumière des cinq grandes questions qu'explore Alain Badiou : démocratie, liberté, universalité, langage et incarnation."--Page 4 of cover. (shrink)

Maria Kakogianni : On dit toujours que Platon est un anti-démocrate, eh bien, je pense qu'il est avant tout un antilibéral. On fait de lui un métaphysicien idéaliste, alors que c'est un très fin stratège. Et qui dit stratège, dit bataille. Il recherche sans arrêt les coordonnées d'un nouveau type de conflit. Comment changer un régime qui fonctionne au "changement" et à la "critique" ; qui fabrique des rebels without a cause pour annuler toute possibilité de révolte logique? Alain (...) Badiou : C'est en effet une question importante et difficile. Il y a deux voies, depuis toujours. Celle des principes d'abord, qui permet de "lire" la société au rebours de sa prétention normative. Les sociétés contemporaines ne sont nullement libres, car la "liberté" individuelle qu'elles promeuvent est en réalité la "liberté" de consommer les produits, le plus souvent laids et inutiles, voire nuisibles, dont la production et la circulation enrichissent sans mesure une oligarchie très restreinte. Et cette prétendue "liberté" se paie d'inégalités monstrueuses aggravées par des crises dévastatrices. L'autre voie est la construction d'une force politique apte à tenir pour réel ce que le capitalo-parlementarisme dominant déclare impossible. Il s'agit dans ce cas d'une effectuation des principes, toujours locale, et qui demande une invention toujours renouvelée, pour que les mots d'ordre dont les masses populaires sont saisies soient en quelque sorte dictés par les gens eux-mêmes, dès lors qu'ils sont positivement touchés par les principes communistes. (shrink)

Why bother to praise mathematics when you claim, as Alain Badiou does, that philosophy is first and foremost a metaphysics of happiness, or else it’s not worth an hour of trouble? What possible relationship can there be between mathematics and happiness? That is precisely the issue at stake in this dialogue, which serves as a very accessible introduction to what mathematics is and an exploration of the crucial influence it has always exerted on the greatest philosophers. Far from the (...) thankless, pointless exercises they are often thought to be, mathematics and logic are indispensable guides to ridding ourselves of dominant opinions and making possible an access to truths, or to a human experience of the utmost value. That is why mathematics may well be the shortest path to the true life, which, when it exists, is characterized by an incomparable happiness. (shrink)

Lacan a été, depuis la fin des années cinquante du dernier siècle, un compagnon essentiel autant que malaisé de mon itinéraire intellectuel. Aussi dans ce Séminaire la controverse est-elle constamment mêlée à la surprise étonnée devant les inventions du maître. On chemine comme on peut, dans la broussaille parfois. Mais on rencontre tant de formules décisives! Celle que je retiendrai parmi tous ces trésors verbaux consiste à dire que l'objectif de la cure est "d'élever l'impuissance à l'impossible". Ce pourrait bien (...) être la définition, par moi cherchée depuis longtemps, et que Lacan avait trouvée de longue date pour un usage tout différent, de la philosophie. Alain Badiou. (shrink)

Tenu en 1983-1984, le séminaire intitulé L'Un, qui porte sur Descartes, Platon et Kant, est le premier du point de vue chronologique. Il inaugure le cycle de cinq années où Alain Badiou revisite toute l'histoire de la philosophie, de Parménide à Heidegger. Cette excursion passionnante aboutira à la rédaction de L'être et l'événement, dont l'Un est le concept majeur, avec la thèse radicale que, d'une certaine façon, le Sujet a toujours été l'objet de la philosophie.

La République de Platon est peut-être le texte le plus connu, le plus traduit et le plus commenté de toute l’histoire de la philosophie. Mais comment restituer la vérité de cette œuvre aujourd’hui, 2500 ans après sa rédaction? Alain Badiou a choisi d’inventer un genre nouveau pour rendre au texte de Platon son universalité et sa vivacité sans passer par un commentaire critique. Il a traduit l’œuvre à partir de l’original grec et a procédé à quelques changements afin de (...) l’adapter à notre temps. Tout d’abord, il a supprimé toute référence aux particularités de la société grecque antique, des interminables développements sur la valeur morale des poètes aux considérations politiques destinées par Platon à la seule élite aristocratique (les mesures révolutionnaires que Platon réserve aux seuls « gardiens » de la cité valent, sous la plume de Badiou, pour tous les habitants du pays). Il a élargi les références culturelles : la philosophie fait feu de tout bois, ainsi Socrate et ses compagnons connaissent-ils Beckett, Pessoa, Freud et Hegel. Ils réalisent l’actualité intemporelle de toute philosophie véritable, propre à s’ajuster à son époque. Enfin, Badiou, par ailleurs dramaturge, a fait du dialogue socratique une véritable joute oratoire : dans cette version de la République, les interlocuteurs de Socrate ne se contentent pas d’approuver ce qu’énonce le Maître. Ils lui tiennent tête, le mettent en difficulté et livrent ainsi une pensée en mouvement. Grâce à ce travail d’écriture, d’érudition et, avant tout, de philosophie, Alain Badiou donne à lire pour la première fois une version absolument contemporaine, vivante et stimulante du texte de Platon. (shrink)

"Malebranche est un penseur étonnant, et d'autant plus qu'en un sens, pour qui n'est pas chrétien, et chrétien convaincu, il semble inutilisable. Mais quant à la sincérité, à la lumière qui baigne toute l'entreprise, au style souple et charmeur, à la conviction audacieuse et toujours sur la brèche de ses stupéfiantes démonstrations, Malebranche est incomparable. On va de merveille en merveille, comme si on visitait une admirable église remplie de petites peintures toutes plus surprenantes les unes que les autres. Lorsque (...) je suis revenu au Traité de la nature et de la grâce, quelque chose comme une grâce m'a en effet touché. J'espère qu'à votre tour, lecteurs, vous en serez touchés", Alain Badiou. (shrink)