No description available.

In this thesis I reject a sceptical argument that was recently formulated by Alan Chalmers (2003) by exploring the different meanings and implications of the thesis of the theory-ladenness of observation (TLO). I show that it is in fact a version of Agrippa's trilemma and choose a well-known solution to the latter, i.e., the causal-reliabilist theory of justification, in order to reject Chalmers' sceptical conundrum.

Experiences are usually multi-faceted and made up of different features. These features are called qualia, the various ways that colours, sounds, and pains, for example, feel to us - the way that they appear to be. These qualitative features are a central part of our lives and seem to have important connections with the world around us - a world which seems to be largely if not entirely physical.

This thesis has two parts. The first part is a development of Dionysius the Areopagites' theophanic notion of being, what I call his notion of the mystery of being-as-ikon, in relation to his epistemology and theory of language. The second part is an application of this notion to certain epistemological and linguistic issues in western philosophy. The purpose of the thesis is to develop a Dionysian philosophical theology through the notion of being-as-ikon in dialogue with western philosophy.

Frank Jackson’s knowledge argument is a very influential piece of reasoning that seeks to show that colour experiences constitute an insoluble problem for science. This argument is based on a thought experiment concerning Mary. She is a vision scientist who has complete scientific knowledge of colours and colour vision but has never had colour experiences. According to Jackson, upon seeing coloured objects, Mary acquires new knowledge that escapes her complete scientific knowledge. He concludes that there are facts concerning colour experiences that scientific knowledge can neither describe nor explain. Specifically, these facts involve the occurrence of certain non-physical properties of experiences that he calls qualia. The present research considers whether a plausible formulation of the hypothesis that science can accommodate colour experiences is threatened by a version of the knowledge argument. The specific formulation of this problem has two motivations. Firstly, before investigating whether the knowledge argument raises a problem for the claim that science can account for colour experiences, we need a plausible formulation of this claim. I argue that the idea that science can accommodate colour experiences can be formulated as the modest reductionism hypothesis. Roughly speaking, this is the hypothesis that a science that can be explanatory interfaced with current physics of ordinary matter can account for conscious experiences. Secondly, an unintelligible premise figures in Jackson’s version the knowledge argument. Namely, it is assumed that Mary possesses a complete (future or possible) scientific knowledge. Nevertheless, the type of strategy involved in Jackson’s argument can be used to target modest reductionism. By considering contemporary psychophysics and neuroscience, I characterise Mary’s scientific knowledge. First, this characterisation is intelligible. In fact, it is elaborated on the basis of descriptions and explanations of colour experiences involved in current physics and neuroscience. Second, a supporter of modest reductionism can assume that the scientific knowledge ascribed to Mary might account for colour experiences. The main conclusion of the present research is that our version of the knowledge argument fails to threaten the modest reductionism hypothesis. In fact, I endorse what can be called the “two ways of thinking” reply to the knowledge argument. According to this response, the knowledge argument shows that there are different ways of thinking about colour experiences. One way of thinking is provided by scientific knowledge. The other way of thinking is provided by our ordinary conception of colour experiences. However, the existence of these two ways of thinking does not imply the existence of facts and properties that escape scientific knowledge. It might be the case that the ordinary way of thinking about colour experience concerns facts and properties described and explained by science. The principal conclusion of the research results from two investigations. The first line of research aims to reveal and evaluate the implicit assumptions that figure in the knowledge argument. The main body of the research is dedicated to this task. The principal result of this investigation is that the knowledge argument must rely on an account of introspective knowledge of colour experiences. I argue that an inferential model of introspection provides such account. On this model, Mary’s capacity to hold beliefs about her colour experiences when she sees coloured objects requires her mastery of colour concepts. The second main investigation seeks to justify the two ways of thinking strategy. As many opponents and supporters have recently started to realise, this strategy might be charged with being ad hoc. I offer a distinctive justification of this reply to the knowledge argument. Assuming the account of introspection mentioned above, the existence of visual recognitional colour concepts might justify this strategy. A person possesses these concepts when she is able to determine the colours of objects simply by having visual experiences.

Il est courant de reconnaître en Hume un philosophe empiriste et un critique de la raison. Cette étude s’attache à examiner le lien unissant ces deux caractérisations, et à mettre en évidence le geste d’extension de l’empirisme par lequel, sous la plume de Hume, l’entendement en vient à être pensé selon un modèle empirico-sceptique. Contrairement à l’idée reçue qui voudrait que la théorie humienne de la raison s’énonce à l’encontre de conceptions «métaphysiques» ou «rationalistes» de cette dernière, il s’agit de montrer que c’est à des auteurs couramment désignés comme empiristes que Hume se confronte lorsqu’il prend la raison pour objet, en tant que ces auteurs seraient restés prisonniers d’une compréhension superficielle de l’expérience. En explorant différents champs (connaissance, passions, morale, histoire, sciences constituées, telle la mécanique), cette étude souligne que la critique humienne de la raison naît d’un approfondissement de l’empirisme, approfondissement qui vient interroger l’idée traditionnelle d’une continuité vis-à-vis des philosophes «empiristes» (notamment Locke et Hutcheson) et d’une mise à distance des auteurs «rationalistes» (notamment Leibniz et Malebranche). Ces positionnements à première vue surprenants s’enracinent dans une exigence d’analyse de l’expérience : c’est seulement en analysant l’expérience immédiate et ordinaire que nous faisons de notre raison qu’il est possible de parvenir à une juste idée de ses pouvoirs, et de poser à nouveaux frais la question de sa légitimité à gouverner notre croyance. / Hume is commonly seen as an empiricist philosopher and as a critic of reason. The project of this thesis is to examine the relation between these two characterizations, and to highlight the way that Hume expands empiricism into the faculty of reason, resulting in a new conception of the understanding, which is both empirical and skeptical. In opposition to the generally accepted idea, which states that Hume's theory of reason is set against "metaphysical" or "rationalist" conceptions of this faculty, the thesis argues that, in his account of reason, Hume mainly critiques "empiricist" philosophers. These thinkers are critiqued for being confined to a superficial view of experience. Through an exploration of several fields (theory of experience, theory of the passions, theory of morals, history, contemporary sciences, such as mechanics), it is shown that Hume's critique of reason stems from an extension and intensification of empiricism. This demonstration challenges the traditional view of Hume, as the heir to the "empiricist" tradition (particularly Locke and Hutcheson) and as a mere critic of the "rationalist" philosophers (particularly Leibniz and Malebranche). These positions, which seem at first sight surprising, are rooted in the demand that experience be analysed : it is only through analysing the immediate and ordinary experience we have of our reasoning that we can arrive at a true account of the powers of reason, and give new ground to the question of the legitimacy of reason to govern our beliefs.

Cette thèse a pour but d’interroger la pertinence des catégories d’objet et de sujet dans le champ politique, à la fois comme outils d’analyse, mais aussi comme support de l’action. Il s’agira ainsi de montrer que les objets, c’est-à-dire tout ce qui vient à occuper une place dans le champ politique, sont le produit d’une construction subjective, dont la mise en œuvre est à la fois individuelle et collective : le monde n’apparaît comme réalité d’objets qu’en tant qu’il est fixé à travers la perception humaine et le langage.Les processus de subjectivation seront alors envisagés selon le double critère d’opposition aux objets du monde, ou de leur utilisation stratégique. Le développement de cette thèse sera l’occasion d’adopter une approche pluri-disciplinaire : seront convoqués la psychanalytique, la philosophie, des écrits d’esthétique musicale, ainsi qu’une analyse théorico-historique de certains courants politiques, singulièrement le maoïsme chinois et sa réception française. / The aim of this thesis is to question the relevance of object and subject categories in the political field, as tool for the analysis but also as props for action. The focus will be on showing that objects, namely, everything that comes to occupy a place in the political field, are the product of a subjective construction, which is carried out both individually and collectively : the world appears as a reality of objects only insofar as it is established through human perception and language.Subjectification processes will then be considered using the double criterion of opposition to world objects or of their strategic use. The central part of this thesis will afford the opportunity to adopt a pluridisciplinary approach : it will rest on psychoanalysis, philosophy, drawn mainly from the Works of J. Derrida and A. Badiou, writings on musical esthetics, as well as a theoretico-historical analysis of a few political movements, particularly Chinese Maoism and its French reception.

La question centrale de cette étude est celle de savoir si les expériences perceptives peuvent être conçues comme des manières d’être réellement en contact avec le monde et si elles peuvent nous fournir des raisons d’entretenir certaines propositions à propos du monde, voire nous permettre d’acquérir des connaissances à son sujet. Cette compréhension intuitive de la perception est aujourd’hui comme hier largement combattue. Ce rejet passe généralement par l’adoption d’une forme ou d’une autre d’internalisme (de la perception et/ou de la justification et de la connaissance perceptive). Percevoir serait un phénomène purement ou essentiellement interne aux sujets dotés de capacités perceptives dont on pourrait douter qu’il puisse nous permettre de croire de manière justifiée ou de connaître quoi que ce soit. Peut-on éviter cette conclusion ? Peut-on apaiser les angoisses philosophiques qu’elle fait apparaître (sans pourtant affirmer y mettre fin ou encore qu’elles n’ont aucun sens) ? Tel est le but de cette étude. L’enquête philosophique proposée ici prend essentiellement trois formes: métaphysique, ontologique et épistémologique. Une investigation de la nature métaphysique de l’expérience perceptive est ensuite mise en œuvre. L’enjeu est alors de soutenir une forme assez robuste d’externalisme de la perception (Disjonctivisme métaphysique). De la nature de la perception, nous en venons dans une seconde partie à une réflexion ontologique sur la nature des propriétés avec lesquelles l’expérience perceptive nous met semble-t-il en contact. Le réalisme de la couleur est défendu contre diverses attaques antiréalistes. Les couleurs sont des propriétés réelles des choses auxquelles on les attribue correctement. Une ontologie réaliste, non réductive et non relationnelle des propriétés chromatiques est esquissée (Primitivisme de la couleur). Enfin, les enjeux épistémologiques de la perception sont mis en lumière et discutés. Nous défendons l’idée que l’expérience perceptive, en tant qu’elle nous met véritablement en contact avec le monde (objets, propriétés, faits, etc.), est un moyen par lequel certains êtres peuvent entretenir des croyances justifiées quoique cette justification soit non réflexive et prima facie. Différentes réponses aux attaques sceptiques contre la possibilité de connaître perceptivement certaines propositions sont enfin envisagées et rejetées. Une autre stratégie anti-sceptique est proposée (une défense néo-mooréenne de la possibilité de la connaissance perceptive, et une remise en cause du défi sceptique lui-même). Finalement, à la question philosophique classique « L’esprit peut-il réellement être en contact perceptif et cognitif avec le monde ? », rien ne nous force à répondre par la négative, que cette question soit abordée du point de vue de la métaphysique de la perception, d’un point de vue ontologique ou épistémologique. Du moins, c’est ce que notre étude cherche à montrer en soulignant à la fois qu’une réponse positive à cette question est parfaitement viable, voire correcte, et que la réponse négative a, quant à elle, toutes les chances d’être passablement erronée / The main topic of this study is to discuss the idea according to which perceptual experiences sould be conceive as ways of being in contact with the world and perceptual experiences can give reasons for believing some propositions about the world and can give rise to knowledge. Lots of philosophers countervail this intuitive and naive conception of perception. This rejection is linked to the fact that they adopt an internalist conception of perception and/or justication and/or perceptual knowledge. Perceiving sould be conceive as an purely internal event of subjects which possess perceptual capacities. And so, one may doubt that they can have justifications for their beliefs or that they can know anything. Is it possible to avoid this conclusion ? How to alleviate philosophical fear that this conclusion gives rise ? That is the aim of this study. The proposed philosophical inquiry comes in three forms. In the first place, indirect conception of perception is examined and criticized. Afterwards, an inquiry about the nature of perceptual experience is pursued. The stake for us is to defend a strong form of externalism about perception (metaphysical disjunctivism). Then, in the second part of this work, we get into an ontological reflexion about the nature of properties that perceptual experience seems to acquaintance us with. Color Realism is defended against various antirealist objections. Colors are or can be real properties of things. A realist, non redutive and non relationnal ontology for chromatic properties is sketched (color Primitivism). Lastly, the epistemological stakes of perception are underlined and examined. We defend the idea that perceptual experience is a mean by which certain beings can have justified beliefs although this justification is not reflexive and prima facie. It can be so if it's true that perceptual experience puts us in contact with the world (objects, properties, facts, etc.). We examine and reject different replies to skeptical attacks against the possibility of knowing anything. Then, another strategy is proposed (a morean defense of perceptual knowledge and the questioning of skeptical challenge itself). In fact, from an metaphysical, ontological or epistemological point of view, we don't have to give a negative reponse to the classical and philosophical question "Can mind be really in perceptual and cognitive contact with the world ?" or so we think. Indeed, our study underlines that a positive reply to this question is sustainable, not to say correct, and that the negative reponse is probably wrong