Thèse--Faculté des lettres--Lausanne--Université de Lausanne, 1993. / Bibliogr. p. 285-302.

Esta tese realiza uma investigação da obra de Claude Lefort (1924-2010), com o objetivo de mostrar que a ideologia é central no entendimento, tanto do seu pensamento, como de sua teoria da democracia. Pressupõe-se que a ideologia não é simplesmente um objeto privilegiado de interpretação em seus escritos, pois o seu pensamento, seu trabalho sobre a obra de Maquiavel e de Marx, suas teorizações a respeito da democracia e do totalitarismo, fundamentam-se neste movimento de desvelar o significado das representações ideológicas, das certezas. Por meio da ideologia, podemos compreender o estatuto de seu discurso, o qual interroga e sabe ser habitado por ela, ao mesmo tempo que dela não se distancia e, estando nela enredado, busca a constância de uma interrogação acerca de seu conteúdo latente e das denegações por ela proferidas. Considera-se, por conseguinte, que, contrário a todo ponto de vista de certeza, o pensamento de Lefort aponta para uma reflexão sobre as ambiguidades da democracia, preocupando-se com aquilo que há de paradoxal nesta forma de sociedade e que a faz passar para o totalitarismo. Esta tese está estruturada em duas linhas de discussão: a primeira delas procura compreender a obra da ideologia na obra de Lefort, ou seja, parte da hipótese de que os seus movimentos de pensamento foram engendrando-se ao longo de sua trajetória com o objetivo de abrir novas vias para uma reflexão crítica, capaz de colocar a ideologia em questão. Nesse ponto, considera-se que a sua filosofia, enquanto pensamento do político, pode ser compreendida como aquela que se elaborou como crítica, deciframento e desvelamento da ideologia. A segunda discute a ideologia na obra de Lefort, preocupando-se em compreender a construção de sua reflexão e a significação atribuída pelo autor a ela, o que implica considerar os autores e acontecimentos que o influenciaram nesse processo, bem como a dinâmica de sua própria produção intelectual, isto é, os momentos em que o autor a tem como algo latente em seus artigos e naqueles em que ela se torna objeto explícito de discussão. Propõe-se que a ideologia está em toda a sua obra, até mesmo quando Lefort reflete sobre um tema central em seus estudos: a invenção democrática. Para isso, discutem-se os efeitos e consequências políticas da ideologia na democracia, pois embora ela seja instituída pela interrogação, movida pelo princípio de invenção e reinvenção permanentes, pela indeterminação, ela também se mostra petrificada, cristalizada e determinada pelo discurso ideológico. / This thesis investigates the work of Claude Lefort (1924-2010) aiming to demonstrate that ideology is seminal to understand both his thought and his theory of democracy. We presume that ideology is not merely a privileged object of interpretation in his writings, since his thinking, his work on the writings of Machiavelli and Marx, and his theorizing on democracy and totalitarianism are based on the effort to reveal the meaning of ideological representations, of certainties. Ideology helps us to understand the statute of his discourse, which interrogates ideology and knows how to be inhabited by it and, at the same time, doesn\'t veer away from it. By being entangled in it, his discourse seeks the constancy of an interrogation on its latent content and the denials it pronounces. We defend therefore that, contrary to all points of views of certainty, Lefort\'s thought points to a reflection on the ambiguities of democracy; he is preoccupied with the paradoxical aspects of that form of society that make it shift toward totalitarianism. This thesis features two different lines of discussion. The first one seeks to understand the \"work\" of ideology in the work of Lefort, i.e., it is based on the assumption that his thought processes developed together with his pathway aiming to open new avenues for critical reflection that may question ideology. At this point, we assume that his philosophy - as the thinking of the political - can be understood as one which developed as criticism, the deciphering and unveiling of ideology. The second line discusses ideology in the work of Lefort and aims to understand the construction of his reflection and the meaning he gives it, which implies taking into account the authors and events that influenced that process, as well as the dynamics of his own intellectual production, i.e., the moments ideology appears as something latent in his articles and those where it becomes an explicit object of discussion. We suggest that ideology permeates his entire work, even when Lefort reflects on a central theme of his studies: the democratic invention. To demonstrate that, we discuss the political effects and consequences of ideology on democracy, because although the latter is established by interrogation, driven by the principle of permanent invention and reinvention, by indeterminacy, it is also petrified, crystallized and defined by the ideological discourse.

Esta tese realiza uma investigação da obra de Claude Lefort (1924-2010), com o objetivo de mostrar que a ideologia é central no entendimento, tanto do seu pensamento, como de sua teoria da democracia. Pressupõe-se que a ideologia não é simplesmente um objeto privilegiado de interpretação em seus escritos, pois o seu pensamento, seu trabalho sobre a obra de Maquiavel e de Marx, suas teorizações a respeito da democracia e do totalitarismo, fundamentam-se neste movimento de desvelar o significado das representações ideológicas, das certezas. Por meio da ideologia, podemos compreender o estatuto de seu discurso, o qual interroga e sabe ser habitado por ela, ao mesmo tempo que dela não se distancia e, estando nela enredado, busca a constância de uma interrogação acerca de seu conteúdo latente e das denegações por ela proferidas. Considera-se, por conseguinte, que, contrário a todo ponto de vista de certeza, o pensamento de Lefort aponta para uma reflexão sobre as ambiguidades da democracia, preocupando-se com aquilo que há de paradoxal nesta forma de sociedade e que a faz passar para o totalitarismo. Esta tese está estruturada em duas linhas de discussão: a primeira delas procura compreender a obra da ideologia na obra de Lefort, ou seja, parte da hipótese de que os seus movimentos de pensamento foram engendrando-se ao longo de sua trajetória com o objetivo de abrir novas vias para uma reflexão crítica, capaz de colocar a ideologia em questão. Nesse ponto, considera-se que a sua filosofia, enquanto pensamento do político, pode ser compreendida como aquela que se elaborou como crítica, deciframento e desvelamento da ideologia. A segunda discute a ideologia na obra de Lefort, preocupando-se em compreender a construção de sua reflexão e a significação atribuída pelo autor a ela, o que implica considerar os autores e acontecimentos que o influenciaram nesse processo, bem como a dinâmica de sua própria produção intelectual, isto é, os momentos em que o autor a tem como algo latente em seus artigos e naqueles em que ela se torna objeto explícito de discussão. Propõe-se que a ideologia está em toda a sua obra, até mesmo quando Lefort reflete sobre um tema central em seus estudos: a invenção democrática. Para isso, discutem-se os efeitos e consequências políticas da ideologia na democracia, pois embora ela seja instituída pela interrogação, movida pelo princípio de invenção e reinvenção permanentes, pela indeterminação, ela também se mostra petrificada, cristalizada e determinada pelo discurso ideológico. / This thesis investigates the work of Claude Lefort (1924-2010) aiming to demonstrate that ideology is seminal to understand both his thought and his theory of democracy. We presume that ideology is not merely a privileged object of interpretation in his writings, since his thinking, his work on the writings of Machiavelli and Marx, and his theorizing on democracy and totalitarianism are based on the effort to reveal the meaning of ideological representations, of certainties. Ideology helps us to understand the statute of his discourse, which interrogates ideology and knows how to be inhabited by it and, at the same time, doesn\'t veer away from it. By being entangled in it, his discourse seeks the constancy of an interrogation on its latent content and the denials it pronounces. We defend therefore that, contrary to all points of views of certainty, Lefort\'s thought points to a reflection on the ambiguities of democracy; he is preoccupied with the paradoxical aspects of that form of society that make it shift toward totalitarianism. This thesis features two different lines of discussion. The first one seeks to understand the \"work\" of ideology in the work of Lefort, i.e., it is based on the assumption that his thought processes developed together with his pathway aiming to open new avenues for critical reflection that may question ideology. At this point, we assume that his philosophy - as the thinking of the political - can be understood as one which developed as criticism, the deciphering and unveiling of ideology. The second line discusses ideology in the work of Lefort and aims to understand the construction of his reflection and the meaning he gives it, which implies taking into account the authors and events that influenced that process, as well as the dynamics of his own intellectual production, i.e., the moments ideology appears as something latent in his articles and those where it becomes an explicit object of discussion. We suggest that ideology permeates his entire work, even when Lefort reflects on a central theme of his studies: the democratic invention. To demonstrate that, we discuss the political effects and consequences of ideology on democracy, because although the latter is established by interrogation, driven by the principle of permanent invention and reinvention, by indeterminacy, it is also petrified, crystallized and defined by the ideological discourse.

Zugl.: Frankfurt (Main), Univ., Diss., 2008

Trata-se de uma leitura do livro O trabalho da obra Maquiavel (1972), opus magnum de Claude Lefort (1924-2010). Com base na distinção lefortiana entre discurso manifesto e palavra latente da obra de pensamento, concebemos nosso texto a partir de uma divisão tripla. Inicialmente, com o objetivo de localizar o leitor ciceroneando-o pelos mesmos caminhos que levaram Lefort a Maquiavel , perguntamos: se à obra do secretário florentino dedica-se o discurso manifesto do filósofo francês, como este objeto se inseriria na problemática de seu hic et nunc, temática latente que o motivou a levar a cabo o seu mais longo estudo? Em seguida, apresentaremos nossa interpretação do Maquiavel de Lefort, na qual veremos emergir ao primeiro plano a personagem do conspirador, trazendo à cena consigo a proposição da inevitabilidade da impostura do poder e a defesa da imprescindibilidade e da legitimidade do ato ilegal empreendido contra a legalidade ilegítima. Por fim, é à crítica ao idealismo democrático que somos conduzidos ao nos depararmos com o saldo de nossa leitura e, diante dele, questionarmo-nos: de que modo o Maquiavel de Lefort conteúdo manifesto deste trabalho pode nos ajudar a pensar o nosso próprio tempo, a sustentar os nossos desejos de saber e de agir, a nos engajarmos aqui e agora no enigma de uma paixão realista, palavra latente de todo e qualquer escrito que aceite o desafio do político? / This is a reading of the book Machiavelli in the making (1972), the magnum opus of Claude Lefort (1924-2010). Based on the Lefortian distinction between the manifest discourse and the latent word in the work of thought, the text is in three parts. Initially, with the aim of locating the reader by guiding him along the same paths that led Lefort to Machiavelli we ask: if the manifest discourse of the French philosopher is dedicated to the work of the Florentine Secretary, what is the place of this object in the problematic of his hic et nunc, the latent thematic that led him to undertake his longest study? Next, we present our interpretation of Leforts Machiavelli, in which we will see the conspirator\'s character emerge to the foreground, bringing with him the proposition of the inevitability of the imposture of power and the defense of the indispensability and legitimacy of the illegal act employed against illegitimate legality. Finally, we are led to a critique of democratic idealism as we are confronted with the results of our reading and, faced with this, we ask ourselves: how can Leforts Machiavelli the manifest object of this work help us to think about our own time, to sustain our desires to know and act, to engage ourselves here and now in the enigma of a realistic passion, the latent word of each and every text that accepts the challenge of the political?

Trata-se de uma leitura do livro O trabalho da obra Maquiavel (1972), opus magnum de Claude Lefort (1924-2010). Com base na distinção lefortiana entre discurso manifesto e palavra latente da obra de pensamento, concebemos nosso texto a partir de uma divisão tripla. Inicialmente, com o objetivo de localizar o leitor ciceroneando-o pelos mesmos caminhos que levaram Lefort a Maquiavel , perguntamos: se à obra do secretário florentino dedica-se o discurso manifesto do filósofo francês, como este objeto se inseriria na problemática de seu hic et nunc, temática latente que o motivou a levar a cabo o seu mais longo estudo? Em seguida, apresentaremos nossa interpretação do Maquiavel de Lefort, na qual veremos emergir ao primeiro plano a personagem do conspirador, trazendo à cena consigo a proposição da inevitabilidade da impostura do poder e a defesa da imprescindibilidade e da legitimidade do ato ilegal empreendido contra a legalidade ilegítima. Por fim, é à crítica ao idealismo democrático que somos conduzidos ao nos depararmos com o saldo de nossa leitura e, diante dele, questionarmo-nos: de que modo o Maquiavel de Lefort conteúdo manifesto deste trabalho pode nos ajudar a pensar o nosso próprio tempo, a sustentar os nossos desejos de saber e de agir, a nos engajarmos aqui e agora no enigma de uma paixão realista, palavra latente de todo e qualquer escrito que aceite o desafio do político? / This is a reading of the book Machiavelli in the making (1972), the magnum opus of Claude Lefort (1924-2010). Based on the Lefortian distinction between the manifest discourse and the latent word in the work of thought, the text is in three parts. Initially, with the aim of locating the reader by guiding him along the same paths that led Lefort to Machiavelli we ask: if the manifest discourse of the French philosopher is dedicated to the work of the Florentine Secretary, what is the place of this object in the problematic of his hic et nunc, the latent thematic that led him to undertake his longest study? Next, we present our interpretation of Leforts Machiavelli, in which we will see the conspirator\'s character emerge to the foreground, bringing with him the proposition of the inevitability of the imposture of power and the defense of the indispensability and legitimacy of the illegal act employed against illegitimate legality. Finally, we are led to a critique of democratic idealism as we are confronted with the results of our reading and, faced with this, we ask ourselves: how can Leforts Machiavelli the manifest object of this work help us to think about our own time, to sustain our desires to know and act, to engage ourselves here and now in the enigma of a realistic passion, the latent word of each and every text that accepts the challenge of the political?

Introduction : Cette étude vise à évaluer la stabilité de la chirurgie LeFort I multisegmentaire à moyen (fin du traitement orthodontique) et à long termes dans les trois plans de l'espace (transversal, antéro-postérieur et vertical). Matériel et méthodes : L'échantillon étudié est composé de 31 patients traités en clinique privée, ayant eu une chirurgie LeFort I multisegmentaire en deux, trois ou quatre morceaux, et ayant terminé leur traitement orthodontique. Parmi eux, 17 patients ayant terminé leur traitement orthodontique depuis plus de deux ans (moyenne de trois ans post-traitement) ont permis d'évaluer la stabilité de la procédure chirurgicale à long terme. La collecte des données a été réalisée sur des modèles et des radiographies céphalométriques latérales pris à des temps précis tout au long du traitement orthodontique, ainsi que pendant la période de contention. Concernant l'analyse statistique, des T-tests et des corrélations de Pearson ont été utilisés. Le test de Bland-Altman et le coefficient de corrélation intra-classe ont permis d'analyser les fiabilités intra-examinateur et inter-examinateurs. Résultats : Une récidive transverse significative, mais très faible cliniquement, est constatée aux niveaux prémolaires et molaires entre la chirurgie et la fin du traitement orthodontique. Elle est corrélée avec l’expansion totale réalisée. Cette récidive transverse est non significative suite au traitement orthodontique. Aucune corrélation statistiquement significative n'est mise en évidence entre le nombre de segments et la récidive transverse postchirurgicale. Une variation de certaines mesures antéro-postérieures et verticales statistiquement significative, mais faible cliniquement, est notée entre la chirurgie et la fin du traitement orthodontique (avancement et impaction postérieure). Pour les mesures antéro-postérieures et verticales, aucun changement n'est statistiquement significatif suite au traitement orthodontique. Conclusion : Pour l'échantillon étudié, la stabilité de l'ostéotomie de type LeFort I multisegmentaire est très bonne, dans les trois plans de l'espace étudiés. / Introduction : The aim of this study was to evaluate the medium and long term stability of segmented LeFort I surgery in all three planes of space (transverse, sagittal and vertical). Materials and methods : The sample consisted of 31 private practice patients that received a two, three, or four-piece segmented LeFort I surgery and who had finished their orthodontic treatment. Study models and cephalometric radiographs were analyzed before treatment, before surgery, after surgery, and at the end of the orthodontic treatment for the 31 patients as well as a minumum two years into retention for 17 patients (mean of 3 years post-treatment). T-tests and Pearson correlation tests were used. Intra and inter-examiner reliability were verified with Bland Altman and intraclass coefficient tests. Results : A statistically significant transverse relapse was seen at the premolars and molars between surgery and the end of orthodontic treatment, that has little clinical significance. The relapse is correlated with the effective expansion. There was no significant relapse after orthodontic treatment was completed. There was no correlation between the amount of relapse observed and the amount of segments. Statistically significant changes were measured in the post surgical phase for maxillary advancement and impaction cases, but were shown to be of limited clinical significance. After removal of fixed appliances, no significant changes were noted. Conclusion : Multisegmented Lefort I surgery appears to have good stability in all three planes of space in the studied sample.

Introduction : Cette étude vise à évaluer la stabilité de la chirurgie LeFort I multisegmentaire à moyen (fin du traitement orthodontique) et à long termes dans les trois plans de l'espace (transversal, antéro-postérieur et vertical). Matériel et méthodes : L'échantillon étudié est composé de 31 patients traités en clinique privée, ayant eu une chirurgie LeFort I multisegmentaire en deux, trois ou quatre morceaux, et ayant terminé leur traitement orthodontique. Parmi eux, 17 patients ayant terminé leur traitement orthodontique depuis plus de deux ans (moyenne de trois ans post-traitement) ont permis d'évaluer la stabilité de la procédure chirurgicale à long terme. La collecte des données a été réalisée sur des modèles et des radiographies céphalométriques latérales pris à des temps précis tout au long du traitement orthodontique, ainsi que pendant la période de contention. Concernant l'analyse statistique, des T-tests et des corrélations de Pearson ont été utilisés. Le test de Bland-Altman et le coefficient de corrélation intra-classe ont permis d'analyser les fiabilités intra-examinateur et inter-examinateurs. Résultats : Une récidive transverse significative, mais très faible cliniquement, est constatée aux niveaux prémolaires et molaires entre la chirurgie et la fin du traitement orthodontique. Elle est corrélée avec l’expansion totale réalisée. Cette récidive transverse est non significative suite au traitement orthodontique. Aucune corrélation statistiquement significative n'est mise en évidence entre le nombre de segments et la récidive transverse postchirurgicale. Une variation de certaines mesures antéro-postérieures et verticales statistiquement significative, mais faible cliniquement, est notée entre la chirurgie et la fin du traitement orthodontique (avancement et impaction postérieure). Pour les mesures antéro-postérieures et verticales, aucun changement n'est statistiquement significatif suite au traitement orthodontique. Conclusion : Pour l'échantillon étudié, la stabilité de l'ostéotomie de type LeFort I multisegmentaire est très bonne, dans les trois plans de l'espace étudiés. / Introduction : The aim of this study was to evaluate the medium and long term stability of segmented LeFort I surgery in all three planes of space (transverse, sagittal and vertical). Materials and methods : The sample consisted of 31 private practice patients that received a two, three, or four-piece segmented LeFort I surgery and who had finished their orthodontic treatment. Study models and cephalometric radiographs were analyzed before treatment, before surgery, after surgery, and at the end of the orthodontic treatment for the 31 patients as well as a minumum two years into retention for 17 patients (mean of 3 years post-treatment). T-tests and Pearson correlation tests were used. Intra and inter-examiner reliability were verified with Bland Altman and intraclass coefficient tests. Results : A statistically significant transverse relapse was seen at the premolars and molars between surgery and the end of orthodontic treatment, that has little clinical significance. The relapse is correlated with the effective expansion. There was no significant relapse after orthodontic treatment was completed. There was no correlation between the amount of relapse observed and the amount of segments. Statistically significant changes were measured in the post surgical phase for maxillary advancement and impaction cases, but were shown to be of limited clinical significance. After removal of fixed appliances, no significant changes were noted. Conclusion : Multisegmented Lefort I surgery appears to have good stability in all three planes of space in the studied sample.

Dans cette thèse de pensée politique, nous examinerons certains des effets engendrés par l’œuvre du marquis de Sade. Nous chercherons à démontrer que le principal de ces effets est la destitution de toutes les tentatives d’ériger des « idoles ». Par « idoles » nous entendons tout ce qui est susceptible de se poser comme un « absolu » – qu’il s’agisse des idoles que l’on peut associer à l’Ancien régime (la monarchie de droit divin par exemple) ou celles, nouvelles, que la révolution pourrait être tentée de leur substituer (la vertu républicaine par exemple). Notre travail s’inspire d’un article de Claude Lefort, « Sade : le Boudoir et la Cité », selon lequel Sade ne peut être ramené à un promoteur du vice ou de la corruption – ce qui ne veut aucunement dire que son œuvre devrait être lue, à l’inverse, comme une défense de la vertu ou de l’incorruptibilité (révolutionnaires ou républicaines). Nous chercherons dans un premier temps à démontrer de quelle manière la destitution des idoles s’applique à des postures littéraires et philosophiques dont Sade a lui-même participé : libertinage, matérialisme et athéisme. Dans un second temps, nous nous concentrerons sur les opuscules politiques de Sade et sur ses engagements politiques. Aux termes de notre travail, apparaîtra alors un Sade, penseur d’une République fondée sur un mouvement d’ « institution/destitution », qui, à la lumière de ce qu’a théorisé Lefort, permet d’intégrer le doute et l’indétermination au sein d’une réflexion sur le politique.

Dans cette thèse, nous cherchons à penser les enjeux philosophiques de l’application de méthodes herméneutiques en histoire de la philosophie politique. À partir d’une étude comparative des interprétations de l’œuvre de Nicolas Machiavel offertes par Leo Strauss, Quentin Skinner et Claude Lefort, nous interrogeons le rapport que l’interprète institue avec le texte qu’il étudie. Nous montrons qu’il y a dans les trois cas un écart entre l’exposition théorique des principes herméneutiques et l’application effective de ces derniers. Nous soutenons que les divergences fondamentales entre les trois lectures des écrits machiavéliens ne trouvent pas leur fondement dans la différence des méthodes employées, mais proviennent en dernier lieu de la compréhension particulière qu’ils ont du rôle et du statut de la pensée de Machiavel. Autrement dit, nous cherchons à montrer que l’intérêt pour la signification de l’œuvre machiavélienne dépasse la simple analyse des écrits d’un auteur du passé; les trois interprètes entretiennent un rapport singulier à la pensée du secrétaire florentin. En ce sens, l’étude des herméneutiques de Strauss, Skinner et Lefort appliquées à Machiavel est indissociable d’une interrogation sur l’articulation entre interprétation et politique.