In this work, we undertake to demonstrate that the merleau-pontian inquiry into art orders itself according to three distinct and successive speculative movements. In the 1940s, the elaboration of a phenomenology of perception led Merleau-Ponty to approach art starting from the work of art and the perceiving subject who receives it, the spectator. From the beginning of the 1950s, this phenomenology of the work of art and aesthetic perception gave way to a philosophy of expression. The point of departure for artistic questioning changes: it is no longer the meaning expressed, but the expressive or creative act. The signification of the work of art sees itself from this moment understood starting from the meaning of being for the artist: the work is a response to perceptive omissions (manques perceptifs) of the artist. At the end of the 1950s, the merleau-pontian progress of thought experiences an ontological turning. Merleau-Ponty wants to regress below the artist, toward Being itself, which imposes itself finally as the true creator. The last merleau-pontian philosophy of art takes from this moment the aspects of a traditional philosophy of inspiration.

La pleine reconnaissance de l’existence du problème de la subjectivation sexuée ou colonisée conduit nécessairement à rendre relatif celui de la subjectivation dite « neutre ». Pourtant, le propre de la conscience dominante est de masquer son propre caractère de domination. Comment forcer la subjectivité dominante à se dévoiler? Nous proposons d’associer la description phénoménologique à une méthode de traduction depuis les expériences des dominé-e-s vers la reconstruction des expériences des dominant-e-s en tant que tel-les. Pour cela, nous partirons, dans une perspective intersectionnelle, des travaux phénoménologiques de Simone de Beauvoir et de Frantz Fanon.The full recognition of the problem of sexual or colonized subjectivation necessarily leads to question the neutrality of “normal subjectivity.” Yet the dominant consciousness tends to mask its own character of domination. How to force dominant subjectivity to reveal itself? We propose to associate the phenomenological description with a method of translation from the experiences of the dominated-ones to the reconstruction of the experiences of the dominants as such. For that, we will rely, in an intersectional perspective, on the phenomenological work of Simone de Beauvoir and Frantz Fanon.

Cet article introduit l’hypothèse de l’oppression nécropolitique des sans-abris. Nous partons d’une analyse métaphorologique de propos tenus par les sans-abris sur leurs conditions d’existence, souvent décrites comme impliquant l’expérience vécue paradoxale d’une indifférenciation tendancielle entre la vie et la mort. Nous essayons de conceptualiser le contenu de ces descriptions en faisant appel au concept de nécropolitique développé par Norman Ajari dans le contexte des études critiques de la race. La nécropolitique sera comprise ici comme un idéal-type de gouvernance de la vie ne se réduisant ni à la biopolitique (soin de la vie de certaines populations), ni à la thanatopolitique (l’extermination de populations jugées indésirables), mais visant plutôt à brouiller les frontières qui séparent la mort de la vie. La nécropolitique est ce qui rend la vie quotidienne des sans-abris proprement invivable, aboutissant à cette vie vécue sous forme-de-mort dont font état les témoignages de certaines personnes sans-abri.This article introduces the hypothesis of the necropolitical oppression of the homeless. We begin with a metaphorological analysis of the discourses held by certain homeless persons regarding their conditions of existence, often described as involving the paradoxical experience of a tendential undifferentiation of life and death. We then build on the concept of necropolitics elaborated by Norman Ajari in the context of critical race theory. Necropolitics will be understood here as an ideal-type of the governance of life reducible neither to biopolitics (caring for the life of certain populations) nor to thanatopolitics (extermination of undesirable populations). Instead, the rationality of necropolitics as a form of oppression consists in constantly blurring the frontiers of life and death. In the case of the homeless, necropolitics is rendering their everyday life literally unlivable, an experience reflected in the analyzed testimonies of homeless persons.

Cet article discute, à travers le parcours critique d’un récent ouvrage d’Anselm Jappe, la thèse d’une illimitation « narcissique » constitutive de la forme subjective propre aux rapports de production capitalistes contemporains. Montrant que cette perspective est fondée sur une conception monolithique et unilatérale de l’histoire du capital et de ses sujets, ainsi que sur une réduction illégitime de toute forme d’in􀏔inité au « mauvais in􀏔ini » de l’illimitation, nous soutenons la nécessité de penser un infini positif irréductible tant à l’illimitation abstraite de la valorisation qu’aux dispositifs capitalistes qui limitent les puissances d’autodétermination et d’autoactivation des individus.This article critically discusses the thesis, recently developed by Anselm Jappe, of a “narcissistic” illimitation constitutive of the subjective form typical of contemporary capitalist relations of production. By showing that this perspective is grounded on a monolithic and one-sided conception of the history of capital and its subjects, as well as on an illegitimate reduction of every form of infinity to the “bad infinity” of illimitation, we defend the necessity to conceive a positive form of infinity, irreducible to both the abstract illimitation of valorization and the capitalist apparatuses that limit the individual power of self-determination and self-activity.

Le but de cet article est de réévaluer l’impact du projet philosophique de Jean Wahl sur la philosophie française postmoderne. L’angle choisi consiste à replacer le projet wahlien dans le cadre des deux grands motifs de la philosophie française de la seconde moitié du XXe siècle: le rejet du paradigme dominant de la vision et le rapport ambivalent à l’hégélianisme, cristallisé dans la 􀏔igure de la conscience malheureuse. En suivant ces deux fils conducteurs, l’article retrace le parcours intellectuel de Jean Wahl depuis sa thèse de doctorat sur les philosophies pluralistes angloaméricaines, en passant par sa réception de l’hégélianisme, pour le mettre en relation avec sa période la moins commentée, celle de l’introduction dans le paysage philosophique français des grands noms du roman moderniste américain de l’époque.The goal of this paper is to re-evaluate the impact of Jean Wahl’s philosophical project on French postmodern philosophy. To complete this task, it is necessary to put the Wahlian project into the context of the two major aims of 20th Century French philosophy: the rejection of ocularcentrism and the ambiguous relationship to Hegelianism characterized by the figure of the Unhappy Consciousness. Following these two threads, the article reconstructs Wahl’s intellectual journey from his Ph.D. on American pluralism to his reception of Hegelianism in order to connect them to his less known work, which consists of introducing American modernist writers into the French philosophical landscape.

Les études sept à neuf de Soi-même comme un autre, dans les-quelles Paul Ricoeur développe sa « petite éthique » souvent quali-fiée d’éthique de la sollicitude, s’achèvent sur une suggestion d’après laquelle la « catégorie de la reconnaissance » exprime adé-quatement la « dialectique du même et de l’autre » au coeur de cette éthique. Jean Greisch y a vu « la cellule germinale du Parcours de la reconnaissance » et a qualifié ce bloc d’études de « premier “travail de reconnaissance” ». Radicalisant ces remarques, nous soutenons que la petite éthique peut être qualifiée d’éthique de la reconnais-sance. Nous fournissons à cette thèse une première assise en clari-fiant le rapport qu’entretient la notion d’estime de soi – fondamen-tale dans la petite éthique, où elle est définie comme la capacité d’une personne à évaluer la cohérence de ses actions avec sa con-ception de la vie bonne, – avec celle de reconnaissance (de soi).

La romancière et essayiste Virginie Despentes s’est imposée par une plume qui fait écho aux travaux de Preciado ou Butler, où, par le biais d’une forme de recherche-création, elle aborde des thèmes tels que la prostitution, la pornographie ou la violence féminine. Partant du principe selon lequel le personnel est politique, sa réflexion expose le caractère construit de ce qu’on prend habituellement pour donner : le soi et l’identité genrée. Cet article entend montrer comment le corps est décrit par Despentes comme lieu d’une potentielle résistance politique dans la mesure où, tout comme le soi, il peut se soustraire du moins en partie aux déterminismes par un processus d’autoreconstruction. En transformant leurs corps de façon à redéfinir leur identité, les personnages décrits par Despentes présentent différentes façons de penser les rapports entre individus, mais surtout, de générer un discours critique qui permet de penser l’identité au-delà des dichotomies de genre. French novelist and essayist Virginie Despentes has become prominent through her literary work, which echoes the works of Preciado or Butler. Through a form of research-creation, Despentes tackles topics such as prostitution, pornography, and female violence. Starting from the principle that “the personal is political,” her reflection exposes the constructed character of what is usually taken as given: the self and gendered identity. This article intends to show how Despentes describes the body as the locus of a potential political resistance insofar as, like the self, it can at least partly escape determinisms by a process of self-reconstruction. By shaping their own bodies so as to redefine their identity, the characters created by Despentes present different ways to rethink the connections between individuals and, most importantly, different ways to generate a critical discourse that allows one to think about identity beyond gender dichotomies.

We examine here the evolution of Merleau-Ponty’s philosophy of history from Humanism and Terror to the 1955 course on “Institution in Personal and Public History” in order to explain what makes it “ambiguous.” This evolution is explained by the desire to understand history according to intersubjective praxis and the dialectical scheme of historical institution. The articulation of these two levels allows Merleau-Ponty to develop a philosophy of historical productivity, that is, a conception of history as a practical process that is open, unfinished, and continually “instituting” by virtue of the always revived and entangled taking up of human actions. Therefore, the more general challenge is to define the specificity of a thought of history that unfolds from the permanent and central concern for the achievement of human coexistence.

Always rich in heterogeneous suggestions, Merleau-Pontian reflection does not fail to address the status of oneiric experience, which is as complex as it is neglected or even trivialized in phenomenological studies. Although it is sometimes taken into consideration, notably in Sartrean analyses, this is only to reconduct it to the activity of the imagining consciousness. This contribution thus proposes to bring out the innovative character of Merleau-Ponty’ dream framework. After outlining the Sartrean considerations, Merleau-Ponty’s positions are briefly presented. Ultimately at stake is showing to what extent the advancement of a sincerely new conception of the dream, together with the rejection of the Sartrean positions, can only take place through reading the work of Ludwig Binswanger. Binswanger’s analyses of oneiric space allow an original approach to dreaming as an authentic experience that reveals a primary spatiality and a more originary mode of existence, thereby testifying to a form of passivity inherent in consciousness. Dreaming thus becomes fundamental for understanding our being-in-the-world in general and, consequently, also for understanding wakefulness.

According to Merleau-Ponty, psychologism, sociologism, and historicism, all of which describe human consciousness as “conditioned”, would be incompatible with any claim to knowledge. However, the reason why knowledge would require a postulate of the autonomy of consciousness remains little explored in the specialized literature. Therefore, in our work we try to separate different aspects of the skeptical problem analyzed by Merleau-Ponty and show that the conditioning of thought is associated, successively, with the possible opaque character of the foundations of our own grasp of the position; the possible ephemeral character of the objects of knowledge; and, finally, of the possible relativity of knowledge to our historical period. In other words, we see that Merleau-Ponty’s argumentation, far from being monolithic, calls for three different solutions concerning the “crisis” of knowledge and that, in turn, the very problem that these are trying to solve is described by the phenomenologist in three different ways. We will also see that Merleau-Ponty’s own position during this period can be described as an internalist and universalist position.