Deleuze suggests that his work grounds a new conception of the Other - the Other as expression of a possible world, as a structure that precedes any subsequent dialectical mediation, including the master-slave dialectic of social relations. I will argue, however, that the ethico-political injunction that Deleuze derives from his analysis of the ‘other-structure’ confronts a different problem. It commits Deleuze to either tacitly prescribing a romantic morality of difference that valorizes expressive encounters without ‘relations of explication’ and any kind of pre-understanding (embodied or otherwise), or his continual flirtations with a mystical ‘going beyond’ the other-structure must be more than mere flirtations.

Kant identified in the “spectators’” enthusiastic response to the French Revolution the clear sign of a moral disposition in humankind. Following Hannah Arendt’s classic interpretation, but departing from it in important respects, I attempt to show in this paper that the “spectatorial” account of Kant’s view of the French Revolution makes sense only if it is understood in terms of a subject’s aesthetic response to objects of natural sublimity, and only if this aesthetic experience is instrumentalized for purposes of moral education.

While the various forms of violence have been the subject of special studies, we lack a paradigm that would allow us to understand the different forms of violence (physical, social, cultural, structural, and so on) as aspects of a unified phenomenon. In this article, I shall take violence as destructive of sense or meaning. The relation of violence to embodiment arises through the role that the body plays in our making sense of the world. My claim is that violence is destructive of this role. It undoes the role of the bodily “I can” in making sense of our surrounding world - be this its physical, cultural, or socialsignificance.

Si nombreux sont les penseurs qui s’aceordent a dire que « notre epoque est celle de I’espace», là où la précedente avait été celle du temps et de I’histoire, les tentatives pour spatialiser nos concepts, et par là sortir des apories induites par la domination du temps (messianisme d’un avenir radieux ou nostalgie d’un passé idyllique) sont diverses (Deleuze, Foucault, Lacan, ete.). Avant eux Merleau-Ponty fut un des premiers à appeler de ses vœux eette spatialisation. C’est cette volonté de Merleau-Ponty de spatialiser nos concepts que I’A. voudrait interroger. Quelle est la fonction de la topologie merleau-pontyenne et surtout quel en est le statut? N’assiste-t-on pas in fine à une difficulté de cette spatialisation de nos notions et ce faisant à un retour à un modèle temporel elassique ? Teiles sont les questions que se propose d’étudier cet article.

This paper presents the origin, development and trajectory of our modes of experiencing beings as presented in Heidegger’s Contributions to Philosophy. It begins by detailing the historical development of our subjective experience of beings leading up to its current arrangement within the modern, technological worldview, and then proceeds to grapple with Heidegger’s recommended pathway out of our technological mode of experience into a more primordial one. I close with some critical reflections on Heidegger’s leap out of technological ‘lived-experience’ (Erleben) into a more authentic ‘experience’(Erfahren) of beings.

J’élaborerai dans ce texte une interprétation de la pensée politique de Negri en tant qu ‘elle est geste, et que je formule de la manière suivante: (1) La pensée politique d’Antonio Negri est principalement, dans son effet le plus important et le plus immédiat, et dans son intention même, thérapeutique ; (2) Une telle lecture permet d’élucider dans cette pensée politique un certain nombre de paradoxes apparents, notamment la question de I’immanence et de la révolution ; (3) Ce geste thérapeutique de transvaluation ontologique relève, à plusieurs égards, d’un mode d’action symbolique qui peut se comprendre comme paradigme de la créativité matérielle et symbolique caracteristique d’une certaine philosophie politique émancipatrice que I’on retrouve chez Socrate, Jésus de Nazareth et Étienne de la Boétie.

Au lieu d’intervenir dans le debat sur la nature du temps present en créant une nouvelle schématisation de notre âge, nous proposons ici une intervention sur ce débat en esquissant les coordonnées conceptuelIes qui déterminent I’espace des possibles de la controverse. Il s ’agil alors d’une réflexion sur la logique historique, sociale et normative qui structure le débat sur le temps présent, et plus particulièrement la controverse postmoderne. Loin pourtant d’être une simple analyse «externe», cette interrogation sur les paramètres conceptuels et pratiques qui déterminent d’avance la nature même des interventions dans le débat postmoderne est aussi I’occasion d’examiner de près des prises de position spécifiques, comme celles d’Alex Callinicos, Fredric Jameson, Jean-Franç;ois Lyotard, IhabHassan, Jürgen Habermas, Richard Rorty et Gianni Vattimo.

In this essay we offer an interpretation of Alain Badiou’s theorisation of Paul the Apostle as a “universal singularity.” Our aim is to explore the extent to which Badiou’s articulation of political subjectivity provides a radically different locus and topos for the “political”—one that is rooted not in a concept of the abstract individual but rather in the material and generative process of individuation (“subjectivation”). Following Badiou, we explore the implications of the ontological shiftthat Paul represents—the shift from an external “body politic” (that of the polis, political crew or community) to an internal “body politic” (based on complicitous bodies, embodiments, incarnations—here a ‘body politic’ complicitous with the Christ-event). In this respect, Badiou’s reading of Paul establishes “the political” as “the subjective” precisely in the sense that the locus of the political is the complicitous subject as such rather than an externalised abstraction such as “thestate.” Paulitics manifests itself in and as this subject subjected to the event—the “militant subject” that embodies and endures its “process,” its “truth procedure.”

In Le Sens du monde, Nancy argues that “some value of scintillating phenomenality remains invincibly attached” to Badiou’s notion of the event. This paper examines to what extent Nancy’s comments still apply to Badiou’s phenomenology of the event developed in Logiques des mondes. In particular, although Badiou provides a thorough account of the event from the perspective of the consequences it enables, I show on the basis of Nancy’s suggestion that he tends to neglect an account of the event from the perspective of its occurrence and its passage.

While Alain Badiou’s resuscitation of the subject has provided continental philosophy with new possibilities for political activism, its reliance on rare events has also paved the way for a potentially paralysing pre-evental situation. The aim of this paper is to examine Badiou’s own writings for hints of a theoreticallyjustified pre-evental politics—one that not only works within the ambit of his philosophical project but is also capable of explaining Badiou’s practical engagements in the politics of France. Two solutions are offered through an examination of the implications of heterogeneous situations: a repetition of events and apre-evental mobilisation of the uncounted.

The essay addresses the main shifts in Badiou’s conception of the event and the subject as they unfold in his late Logiques des mondes. In this text he develops an objective phenomenology of appearing in view of specifying the logical character of real change. The main focus of the essay is how Logiques des mondes stipulates a set of directives for an “ethics of living with an Idea,” that is, a subjective incorporation to truth as exception. How does Badiou’s text write what is excluded from the inertia of a restricted economy of Being? I show that in order to account for this exception, Logiques des mondes must resituate the notionof site, prevalent in Being and Event, and that it does so in terms of the notion of world and of the localisation of appearing (both of which entail the formulation of an objective phenomenology of appearing or logic of appearing). This logic posits the articulation of a new transcendental regime whose major coordinates unfold as a true war machine against cultural relativism, or what Badiou calls “democratic materialism” and to which he contraposes a “materialist dialectics”(dialectique matérialiste).