Is it only yesterday's humanism, whether religious or secular in origin, that is dying - and is it really dying? - or is it more profoundly the very paradigm of humanity? At least it is worth asking the question. Do we not hear on every side today that everything is ‘constructed’ and ‘formated’? No inherited moral standard now seems acceptable, nor any reference to any sort of human nature or naturality. The only idea that henceforth finds acceptance is that of (...) the infinite plasticity of the human, leaving individuals free to shape themselves as they wish beyond any commonly received standard, since only defiance of the norm seems to be the source and proof of freedom. (shrink)

Is it only yesterday's humanism, whether religious or secular in origin, that is dying - and is it really dying? - or is it more profoundly the very paradigm of humanity? At least it is worth asking the question. Do we not hear on every side today that everything is ‘constructed’ and ‘formated’? No inherited moral standard now seems acceptable, nor any reference to any sort of human nature or naturality. The only idea that henceforth finds acceptance is that of (...) the infinite plasticity of the human, leaving individuals free to shape themselves as they wish beyond any commonly received standard, since only defiance of the norm seems to be the source and proof of freedom. (shrink)

Daniele Hervieu-Léger and Marcel Gauchet explain that today the hold that the religious dimension has always exerted over human societies is, of very recent date but definitely, slackening; that it is becoming ‘hollow’ and ceases to inspire collective action, leaving henceforth wide open the question of knowing in which name we should attempt to take our destiny in our hands and base the norms of collective being. This question at once summons up another, implicitly contained in the latter: is every (...) ethical norm (or moral norm, for we are not making a distinction between the two concepts here) ultimately religious in origin, as is most often supposed, or can one in fact conceive of sketching the outlines of a moral code that is immanent within the social relationship, a moral code that is sufficiently coherent and self-consistent to do without, at least in theory, a religious-type transcendence? Here, I should like to make a case for the second response by emphasizing that religion - whatever meaning one bestows on this notion, still undefined today - does not constitute the primary, irreducible social and historical fact that is most often supposed, but that it should itself be interpreted as the formulation of a more original and more universal formulation: the threefold obligation of giving, receiving, and repaying distinguished by Marcel Mauss in his famous Essay on the Gift. Of course, I shall not claim here to do more than sketch a few possible lines of argument. But even before formulating them, I must call to mind two prejudicial objections that my argument has encountered. (shrink)

Is it only yesterday's humanism, whether religious or secular in origin, that is dying - and is it really dying? - or is it more profoundly the very paradigm of humanity? At least it is worth asking the question. Do we not hear on every side today that everything is ‘constructed’ and ‘formated’? No inherited moral standard now seems acceptable, nor any reference to any sort of human nature or naturality. The only idea that henceforth finds acceptance is that of (...) the infinite plasticity of the human, leaving individuals free to shape themselves as they wish beyond any commonly received standard, since only defiance of the norm seems to be the source and proof of freedom. (shrink)

Si c'est "malgré tout" qu'il faut défendre la sociologie, c'est malgré ce qu'elle est devenue. Bien loin de ses grandes espérances initiales et des splendeurs que nous ont léguées les Durkheim, Weber, Simmel, Mead, Elias, Mauss, etc. Ce que l'on appelle sociologie s'est peu à peu recroquevillé jusqu'à apparaître comme la "science (ou la pseudo science) des restes n, la science de ce dont ne parlent ni les philosophes, ni les économistes, ni les historiens, ni les anthropologues, ni les théoriciens (...) de la littérature, etc. Éclatée en de multiples chapelles théoriques ou idéologiques, privée de colonne vertébrale paradigmatique et institutionnelle, elle ne croit plus pouvoir trouver son unité que dans une référence de plus en plus incantatoire au "terrain" et à l'empirisme, et dans ses querelles infinies sur ce qui fait la bonne méthode ou le bon terrain. La sociologie classique, celle qu'il nous faut faire revivre et actualiser, se présentait tout autrement. Elle revendiquait hautement une approche empirique de la réalité et le souci d'établir des faits, elle aussi, mais elle n'imaginait pas que ce puisse être accompli hors-théorie et sans enjeux normatifs, c'est-à-dire éthiques et politiques... Dit autrement, elle se vivait comme le lieu et le moment généraliste de la science sociale générale. C'est cette sociologie là, autrement dit la science sociale générale, qui nous fait désormais défaut et qu'on appelle ici à renaître de ses cendres. (shrink)

Et si la domination n'etait pas la ou on la croit? Et si la facon dont nous nous representons aujourd'hui l'identite, l'humain, les genres, la nature, mais aussi la democratie, le rapport a l'etranger, le contenu meme du savoir, la finalite du droit, si tout cela ne relevait pas en realite d'un savoir objectif mais d'une - ideologie - qui projette de changer l'ordre social et politique mais surtout l'humain? C'est le propre de toute epoque que de trouver dans un (...) ordre d'idees le principe du pouvoir et de la coherence, sauf que cette ideologie se presente comme l'anti-pouvoir, le facteur d'une liberte jamais imaginee. Ce court ouvrage s'efforce d'en construire le modele et de prendre la mesure de l'ampleur de l'agenda du post-modernisme, cette pensee nee en France dans les annees 1970, redecouverte aux etats-Unis et devenue, depuis, la - langue commune - de toutes les elites du monde democratique, a travers ses multiples visages: multiculturalisme, post colonialisme, queer theory, altermondialisme, mondialisme, etc. Dans la perspective de la sociologie de la connaissance, Shmuel Trigano tente d'identifier les centres de pouvoir et l'ordre nouveau qu'installe cette ideologie pour comprendre le contexte de son developpement, notamment la decomposition de l'etat-nation europeen des suites de l'unification europeenne, grosse, selon lui d'une forme de pouvoir de type imperial. Un livre de savoir mais aussi un livre engage qui alerte face a la derniere nee des utopies politiques.". (shrink)

In this essay, Alain Caillé reconstructs the “singular history of the MAUSS (Anti-Utilitarian Movement in the Social Sciences)” from when in early 1980 a group of friends from different disciplines (sociologists, economists, philosophers, etc.) decided to found the “Bulletin du MAUSS” to counter the growing hegemony of utilitarianism and economism in the human sciences and in the philosophical disciplines themselves. The Bulletin would initially become the “Revue du MAUSS trimestrielle” from 1988 to 1992 and from 1993 to 2022 the (...) “Revue du MAUSS semestrielle” until its current anglophone extension “MAUSS International”. The author takes Marcel Mauss’ definition of the gift as a “total social fact” and explains that the gift paradigm is a “translation operator” in the sense that it is continuously enriched in interaction with existing discourses. The theoretical operation that Caillé proposes is to explicate Mauss’s discovery by moving from a simple gift paradigm, based on the perspective of simple reciprocity between giver and recipient, to an expanded gift paradigm. In this way, it can dialogue with other paradigms and other currents of thought (theory of recognition, theory of care, theory of human development, etc.). And from here to a conception of the gift as “adonnement”, i.e. the commitment of human subjects to bring something new and unprecedented into the world. (shrink)

The anthropologist Marcel Mauss, in his famous exploration of the gift in "primitive" and archaic societies, showed that the essential aspect of the exchange of presents involved the establishment of a social tie that bound the parties together above and beyond any material value of the objects exchanged. He argued that these intangible mutual "debts" constituted the social fabric. Godbout and Caillé show that, contrary to the modern assumption that societies function on the basis of market exchange and the (...) pursuit of self-interest, the gift still constitutes the foundation of our social fabric. The authors describe the gift not as an object but as a social connection, perhaps the most important social connection because it creates a sense of obligation to respond in kind. They examine the gift in a broad range of cases such as blood and organ donation; volunteer work; the bonds between friends, couples, and family; Santa Claus; the interaction between performers and their audience; and the relation of the artist to society. Written in an engaging manner, The World of the Gift will appeal to anyone who is interested in how the world really operates. (shrink)

This is a translation of an essay by Alain Caillé originally published in French in La Revue du MAUSS. It addresses the topical issue of the global rise of the far right and examines its relation to traditional totalitarianism and democracy. It discovers paradoxes in the recent political history: the movement is a neoliberal reaction to neoliberalism. Instead of empowering progressive political appeal, economic conditions have driven people into the embrace of ‘tyrannical buffoons’ who promise the intensification of neoliberal (...) reform. This leads to an ‘inverted totalitarianism’ or ‘parcellitarianism’. (shrink)

In his classic essay The Gift, Marcel Mauss argued that gifts can never be truly free; rather, they bring about an expectation of reciprocal exchange. For over one hundred years, his ideas on economy, social relations, and exchange have inspired new modes of thought, none more so than what crystallized in the 1980s around an innovative group of French academics. In The Gift Paradigm, Alain Caillé provides the first in-depth, English-language introduction to La Revue du MAUSS - or, "Anti-Utilitarian Movement (...) in the Social Sciences," combining the work of anthropologists, sociologists, philosophers, and others. Today, the very idea of a "general social science" seems unthinkable, unless you count the pervasive sway of a utilitarian logic in orthodox economics, or the diffuse influence of neoliberalism. Here, Caillé offers a distinctly different reading of economy and society, inspired by Mauss - as vital now as ever. (shrink)

This article calls for a new theoretical synthesis that overcomes the fragmentation, specialization and professionalization within the social sciences. As an alternative to utilitarianism and the colonization of the social sciences by rational choice models, it proposes a new articulation of social theory, the Studies and moral, social and political philosophy. Based on a positive anthropology that finds its inspiration in Marcel Mauss’s classic essay on the gift, it recommends a return to classical social theory and explores articulations between theories (...) of reciprocity, care and recognition. (shrink)

Malgré l’intérêt de Leibniz pour la physique de Huygens, leur correspondance entre 1692 et 1695 renferme plusieurs divergences révélatrices de deux ontologies différentes des corps. Selon Leibniz, les lois de Kepler peuvent être expliquées par une circulation harmonique, alors que Huygens substitue à celle-ci une pesanteur intrinsèque des corps. De plus, pour Huygens, il y a une extension dépourvue de tout corps et pourtant matérielle, ce qui n’est pas compatible avec la métaphysique de Leibniz. Enfin, Huygens explique la cohésion des (...) corps par des atomes extrêmement durs ; Leibniz rejette de telles entités, mais complète les lois du mouvement relatif par un niveau substantiel au-delà de l’étendue. (shrink)

Il est grand temps de faire revivre le projet d ́une théorie sociale générale... et généreuse. En tant que riposte et alternative à la colonisation des sciences sociales par l ́économie néoclassique, nous proposons de reprendre en l'actualisant le projet des grands auteurs classiques, d'Aristote à Marx, de Kant à Habermas, d'Adam Smith à Durkheim et Mauss, de Schumpeter ou Keynes à Polanyi ou Braudel, etc. Contre l ́orthodoxie néoclassique des économistes et la doxa de la neutralité axiologique des sociologues, (...) nous appelons à une nouvelle synthèse de la sociologie classique, de la philosophie morale et politique et des " Studies ". Si les sciences sociales veulent poursuivre leur travail de réflexivité, il est essentiel qu'elles renouent avec la grande tradition et se conçoivent comme la continuation de la philosophie morale et politique par d'autres moyens. Si elles ne réussissent pas à se dégager de l'utilitarisme, elles risquent fort de connaître le même destin que les sociétés et les universités, elles ne seront plus une vocation, mais une profession, et en tant que telles une simple extension du Marché et de l'Etat. (shrink)

Que reste-t-il aujourd’hui de vivant et d’universalisable de ce qui a fait la Gauche – signifiant privilégié de tous les espoirs politiques des deux siècles écoulés – et de l’idéal socialiste qui en était le cœur ? Comment reformuler celui-ci de manière plausible en ces temps de globalisation qui voient l’Europe, berceau de la Gauche et du socialisme, plonger dans l’impuissance..

What steps are needed to make life better and more convivial? The Second Convivialist Manifesto has presented a short diagnosis of the current crises and sketches of a possible and desirable future. It has been a necessary work of theoretical synthesis, but preserving a viable world also requires passion. It is thus urgent to show what people would gain from a shift to a post-neoliberal and post-growth convivialist future. This volume includes a theoretical debate on convivialism which reflects dystopias and (...) shows the multiple and major obstacles that convivialism will have to face. Mainly, however, the contributors to this volume create sketches of a convivial future and collect accounts of another future world which is attractive for as many as possible. (shrink)

Within moral and political philosophy and the social sciences, recent conceptual developments in the concept of recognition cannot be dissociated from an opposition to those theories inspired by what is commonly called rational action theory or the economic model of action. The paradigm of recognition represents the heart of those theories that are both alternative and complementary to the theory of individual action. Nonetheless, this conceptual development calls out for an alliance between political philosophy and the social sciences. We argue (...) that the paradigm of recognition can only be developed to its full potential if it is interpreted in the wake of what Marcel Mauss and the Revue du MAUSS, has called the paradigm of the gift. The gift only takes on its full sense when understood as a means, performer, and symbol of public and/or private recognition. (shrink)

Dans Les Tragiques (1616, « Les feux »), Agrippa d’Aubigné raconte que, alors que dans sa prison le célèbre martyr du Bourg était prêt de flancher : Ce cœur tremblant revint à la voix d’une Caille :Pauvre femme, mais riche, et si riche que lorsUn plus riche trouva l’aumône en ses trésors.O combien d’efficace est la voix qui console,Quand le conseiller joint l’exemple à sa parole,Comme fit celle-là qui, pour ainsi prêcher,Fit en ces mêmes jours sa chaire d’un bûcher. Cette (...) Caille célébrée par... (shrink)

The article presents an overview of the intellectual trajectory of Alain Caillé, the founder and animator of the anti-utilitarian movement in the social sciences (MAUSS) in France. Going back to early influences of Claude Lefort, Karl Polanyi and Pierre Clastres, it shows the centrality of the symbolic constitution of the economy in the development of an intellectual front against rational choice. It also considers how Marcel Mauss’s famous Essay on the Gift has been developed into a ‘gift paradigm’ that (...) aims to unify the various social sciences into a comprehensive alternative to the interest paradigm. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:THE UNITY OF THE VICES JONATHAN JACOBS Oolgate University, Hamilton, New York JOHN ZEIS Oanisius Ooilege, Buffalo, New York W:E SOMETIMES describe someone 1rus "just plain,, ' ' • • 0 " ' ' • • mean, or Just plam d1shonesit, orr JUSt pJam unw." Or we say" thaJt wrus ·a just plain ·stupid thing rto do.," G~a:liizing from tlhese and lik!e descriiptions, we can ask, are there any (...) "just plain" vices? By this I mean, are :amy vices pure, 1e.g., can rthere he Cl'lllelty hut nort injustice or in!t:Jempertance, intemperance hut no!t a £ailill'e orf pmctical wisdom, cowardice but not intemperance or injustice, and so on? Is therie perhaps a unity of the vices? Is each ;a col'l'IU!ption thrat involves the coITUpiting ctontriburtion of the othe'l'IS? If there is,a, run:iity of the vicies, then 1be:inig ra vicious individual is Il!Ort siinply 1a ma!bter o:f failing :across the dimensioill of one or rrunothe.r 1 Cihaa:iae1becisltic. ]t ms tan extensi,ve diaiilure, 1a unified (:if l[JIOrt toit.al) failure, even if it is most evident 1and preVialent in one or another •specific respecit. 'f1his iis not to isay thrut.theiie is just one vice,.any moil'!e 1than '!Jo.endorse the unity of it.he virtues is to reduce tth:em to Ollle. There.are many woes OOlld many virrbues, eaiCh respeotively h!ruving to do with dillemnt 1and variously!l'le1aibed crupacirties, motives, emotions, and tiiaiits. Yet, rut least with respect to the virtues a good caise can be mrude :that they.are unified, aind thrut ·AnisbotLe was oorrreot in concluding that practical wisdom :and viWtues of cha;riacter mum occur st quite 1 s1tably, even if '1llolt happily. In any case, we ail"e in 1 to:tal ag.rteemelllt with Geach when he 1sayis 1that ithaJt "If 1a man's ha1bit of sound moml judgme1J11t is virtiiafod anyiwhere, then :it is at risk eVierywhere; but not all dangel"s issue in disa1sit1e'f!s." 3 But 1thes1e dis1as!ters arie aV1eTted r.not because of,any moml str1ength of characil:er 1 th:ait the agent 1truly ihas bUJt heca:us1 e of a me11e inc1ilJJaition tues. 'Ilhe former may he very :firm ox srtable. Mo11eover the n:aituil'ally vi11tuous rindividual may giener1a1ly no1t he oornfused or.impeded maction by "b.ar:d easies" or nnvelty. Alt times he rmay, 1and lthien me may find his re1sourroes iinoompe1be!I1t O'I.' unoel 'l:Ja1in in 1bhreir direetives. Hut the main rpo:inlt of co111iCT'last is thait mo11al virtues 11eflieot 1a 1evel of 1agency wh1oh involves undersitanding 1and self-determin1ation engiaged 1 to t:hat undersltanding, 1a 1leviel tihJait tis 1ruhsen1t foom iinc1ination-grounded action. Na,tu11a1l vri:r1tues 1a1rie ll101t to he despised, 1 and 1aclts :thait fLorw 1f110m 1tJhem 1are not w:iithout moml Wiortlh. But, using the fangiuiage of Fr1a:nk£u:rt, mom1l virtues are oha1racter]s,tios thait refiecrt second order volitions.5 The aiotis: thait flow fil1om them •are not H11e reis:ult of ways one just hrupens to be. And the undeil'-,starnding involvred in moml vrntues makes mo'ral misdireotion 1 1es;s li1"ely. Again, mnswder suoh t.lrings rus mis1applied oomprussfon, or paiti:errce, whioh can involve u1mairness 1and imprudence. P1 errharpis it.is heoausie rbhe mo:rial V1mtueis rare unified that it is 1so hard to rbe 1good. They invo1vie a complex reperrto:We of judgmenits, d1sposi!tiorrs, and moti¥es. No one of them can he oomp1ete on its own, and wie c1an't oome to have 1 tJhem simply 1hy decis1on. One oan til.'y rbo he move coumgeous bU1t caill't ibring it rubout meriely hy init1emal eommanid. Self-imposrutiion in5 In " Freedom of the Will and 'The Concept of a Person," H. Frankfurt writes, "Someone has a desire of the second order when he wants simply to have a certain desire or when he wants a certain desire to be his will. In situations of the latter kind, I shall call his second-order desires "secondorder volitions" or " volitions of the second order." Now it is having... (shrink)

Sulla scia di un percorso già segnato da appuntamenti importanti e coinvolgenti istituzioni e studiosi italiani e stranieri, centri di studi specializzati, il Volume che qui si presenta raccoglie i contributi del Convegno Internazionale di Studi dedicato a: Lévinas e la cultura del XX secolo, tenutosi a Napoli tra il 10 ed il 12 aprile 2000: G. Lissa, S. Trigano, I. Kajon, E. Méir, S. Petrosino, E. D’Antuono, M. Signore, M. Zarader, D. Cohen-Lévinas, J. Colette, E. Baccarini, D. Banon, (...) P. Amodio, E. Arseneva, è. Levine, F. Ciaramelli, M. Caporale, G. Giannini. (shrink)

We have now had some two decades of Levinas commentary. What remains to be said? Certainly one thing we have learned since Otherwise than Being is that Levinas’s philosophy and his talmudic and confessional writings nourish each other so profoundly that to approach Levinas without understanding the historyof Jewish philosophy — in its confrontations with neo-Platonism, Aristotle, Kant — is to risk misunderstanding Levinas. Insights into the interrelationships between Jewish thought and Levinas’s other humanism have been provided by thinkers like (...) Robert Gibbs, Claire Katz, Catherine Chalier, Shmuel Trigano, and Gérard Bensussan, to name but a few. But if one is not well versed in Jewish thought, will one be liable to abandon Levinas’s thought as an existentialized confessionalism? Perhaps. But I think the loss to philosophy would be considerable. (shrink)

Ce texte a déjà paru dans la Revue du MAUSS, 2011/2, n° 38, p. 339-348. Nous remercions Benjamin Fernandez et Alain Caillé de nous avoir autorisé à le reproduire ici. « Ce que nous vendons à Coca-cola, c'est du temps de cerveau disponible. » Patrick LELAY, ancien président de la chaîne privée française TF1 (2004). La pensée moderne, héritière des Lumières, avait accouché de la figure du sujet libre : une conscience de soi, substance stable et indivisible (Descartes), actrice (...) du langage et d'un (...) - 1. Comment penser le pouvoir dans le monde contemporain ? – Nouvel article. (shrink)

All of us share the same feeling of being torn between two equally impossible attitudes, namely the absurdity of resistance and the abjectness of renunciation, that is to say a feeling of surrender to the course of events and I think that it is true that we are all more or less filled with this feeling or to revert to other terminology which I will borrow from Jacques Ellul, we all have the feeling of being swept away in a haphazard (...) process over which we no longer have any hold. In this respect, I tend to agree with Alain Caillé, that we are at the moment experiencing a shift, a transformation, a revolution - use whichever term you prefer - such as has only happened two or three times in western history and it is true that this great shift is probably comparable, to the Renaissance, say, or the fall of the Roman Empire or possibly the Enlightenment or even the Industrial Revolution in its extent, radicality and also what is enigmatic about it that for those who are experiencing it. There is a radicality in what we are experiencing which is the source of that feeling which sometimes assails us that all resistance would not only be useless but ridiculous. I intend to deconstruct, if I may so express it, this feeling of ridicule which is paralysing us and which indeed paralyses us all the more because it is exploited day after day by talk of flux in which all desires and all ethical or political voluntarism is in general described as some kind of residual archaism. (shrink)

The Gift: Forms and Functions of Exchange in Archaic Societies, by Marcel Mauss, is an important reference in Social Sciences for thinking about the theme of the gift, proposed in this congress. This brief work has as goal to present a rereading of The Gift by contemporary authors that try to think today’s society under this perspective. It’s a literature review of books and articles by Allain Caillé, Jacques Godbout and some Brazilian authors: Eric Sabourin, Marcos Lanna, Paulo Henrique (...) Martins and Jorge Luiz Villela. It is important to emphasize, according to Caillé, 1998, that “the paradigm of the gift is not a machine for blowing solutions, but for inspiring questions”. (shrink)

Assimilé à la French Theory, Jean Baudrillard a été aussi célèbre, ou presque, sur les campus américains que Foucault, Derrida, Deleuze, Guattari ou Lacan. Mais il est loin d'avoir aujourd'hui leur diffusion mondiale. Il a même presque totalement disparu des écrans radars. Officiellement sociologue, aucun sociologue ne le cite, aucun étudiant de sociologie ne le lit. Il faut dire qu'il a tout fait pour brouiller les pistes, en se refusant à tout simulacre de réalisme pour mieux tenter de prendre la (...) réalité de vitesse, jusqu'à annoncer son évanescence dans l'hyper-réalité du virtuel. Sa pensée, fulgurante, attirait étrangement, mais on pouvait croire que cette séduction fatale tenait à un goût tout pataphysicien des paradoxes. Or, force est de se demander s'il n'avait pas au bout du compte vu plus juste et mieux anticipé que tous ses contemporains ce qu'est désormais devenu notre monde. Ce volume, qui réunit sociologues, philosophes, économistes, théoriciens de l'esthétique et des médias, permet de prendre la mesure de son œuvre inclassable. Avec des contributions de : Gérard Briche, Alain Caillé, Jean-Paul Curnier Françoise Gaillard de Serge Latouche, Chin Min, Katharina Niemeye, Nicolas Poirier, Anne de Rugy, Clara Schmelck, François Séguret, Jean-Louis Violeau. (shrink)

In this essay I argue that Marcel Mauss’s “Essay on the Gift” (1925) is not only intended to inaugurate a new paradigm on the terrain of ethnology and anthropology, but at the same time to make the gift a kind of novum organum of the social sciences and of moral and political philosophy itself. In the first part, I reconstructed the critique that M. Merleau-Ponty and C. Lefort have made to Lévi-Strauss’s “structuralist” reading of Mauss, and, in a second part, (...) I emphasised the importance that M. Hénaff assigned to the ceremonial gift of traditional societies as an intentional procedure of public mutual recognition between groups. But, using some of A. Caillé’s indications, I explain that this device of mutual recognition and alliance, characteristic of the gift cycle (giving/receiving/ reciprocating) also applies in modern societies whenever legal-political institutions become sclerotized and lose their legitimacy in the face of new actors in political action (newcomers or new arrivals, to use the Arendtian category of natality in a broad sense). (shrink)

To my mind, the most urgent current task in the social sciences is one in the context of which the unduly cut-and-dried distinctions between positive and normative, between sociology and ethics, between secular pluralism and religious spirituality, and so on, should be abandoned. I would like to reclaim the legacy of a Marxian-type dialectic by stating that the social sciences today (and I would even risk speaking of a single present-day ‘social science’) have the threefold task of (1) thinking through (...) in depth the directions of a desirable social change, (2) asking what are the ‘resources for action’ already available for this end within the totality of social actors and (3) identifying the moral capacities that need to be stimulated and/or created so that the resources for action which are not yet available, but which are desirable under point (1), may be able to take root and flourish. I defy anyone to disentangle clearly and analytically the positive and normative parts of such a task …If the somewhat acrimonious debate on the status of the gift that I have had with Alain Caillé for the last two years continues to hold my interest and if I have eventually overcome my irritation in the face of what has occasionally seemed to me a failure of understanding linked to the defence of an ‘article of local faith’, it is because our debate is a fundamental part of the worthwhile task of the social sciences. Nevertheless, I shall make it clear straight away that the expression ‘sociological gift’ hardly satisfies me, in the light of the description of this task which I have just supplied. (shrink)