L’expérience comme verbe ? Réflexions pragmatistes sur  « expériencer »

Mathias Girel, République des Savoirs, USR3608, ENS-Ulm; dernière version avant épreuves de L’expérience comme verbe ? Réflexions pragmatistes sur « Expériencer », Education permanente, 198, mars 2014. Si la méthode empirique était universellement ou généralement adoptée en philosophie, nous n’aurions aucun besoin de nous référer à l’expérience. Dewey (1925, 2012, 34). L’anglais philosophique des empiristes a une ressource que nous n’avons pas en français, la capacité à faire de l’expérience un verbe. To … Continuer de lire L’expérience comme verbe ? Réflexions pragmatistes sur  « expériencer »

Perfectionism in Practice: Shusterman’s place in Recent Pragmatism 


Building on recent texts, I give a characterization of Richard Shusterman’s specific variant of pragmatism, understood as a melioristic or perfectionist pragmatism, where ethical and political dimensions are deeply intertwined with the epistemological one. To do so, I focus on what seems to be Shusterman’s latest contribution to his interrupted dialogue with Richard Rorty in Thinking through the BodyContinuer de lire « Perfectionism in Practice: Shusterman’s place in Recent Pragmatism « 

Crystal-Clearness: For the Second-Rates

 Dernière version avant épreuves de M. Girel, Crystal-Clearness : For the Second-Rates, dans Torkild Thellefsen (Editor), Bent Sorensen (Editor), The Peirce Quote Book – – Charles Sanders Peirce in His Own Words, de Gruyter, 2014 « Crystal clearness, such as we justly require in mathematics, in law, in economics, is in philosophy the characteristic of the second-rates. The reason is that the strongest men are able to seize an all-important conception … Continuer de lire Crystal-Clearness: For the Second-Rates

How many a priori methods? Still Another look at Fixation of Belief

Draft of a lecture given at the Peirce Lowell Conference, 2014, under revision for publication (c)


In spite of all the inspiring readings of Peirce’s Illustrations, and we have plenty of them, from Douglas Anderson to Tom Short, Vincent Colapietro and others, two problems about the a priori method, believing what pleases reason, seem to be still pending: (1) the method differs dramatically, from one version to another, and these variations suggest that it would be careless to think that Peirce’s “list” of methods in the Illustrations is confined to the “four”, or to only four, methods for the settlement of belief. The function of this method is clearly delimited in a negative way: it consists entirely in the desire that beliefs are fixed neither by individual whims nor by that of the State, but that still leaves a full register of methods, which overlap without being identical. I’ll study three of them here. (2) One can wonder whether it is a method for the fixation of beliefs or a mere method for elucidating beliefs that owe nothing to this method to be deeply rooted in us. Is the method useful for telling which beliefs can be retained because they please reason or for revealing what pleases reason? Continuer de lire « How many a priori methods? Still Another look at Fixation of Belief »

Pragmatisme, publics et auto-transcendance

Pragmatisme, publics et auto-transcendance

Conférence donnée lors du colloque Figures de l’auto-transcendance, Cerisy, 27 juin 2014, autour de Jean-Pierre Dupuy

Le soi est toujours dirigé vers quelque chose qui le dépasse et sa propre unification dépend de l’idée de l’intégration des scènes changeantes du monde dans la totalité imaginaire qu’on appelle univers. Dewey, Une foi commune, 1934, tr. fr., 104.

Continuer de lire « Pragmatisme, publics et auto-transcendance »