This dissertation is a discussion of the challenge that cases of over-determination pose to Act-Consequentialism. Although there are many realistic examples of such cases – for example, pollution, overfishing, or the election of an inappropriate politician – I consider structurally purer examples, one of which I call “Case One.” Suppose that you and I independently shoot and kill a third person called “Victim.” Our bullets arrive at the same time and each shot would have killed Victim by itself. Finally, Victim would not have been killed, if neither of us had pulled the trigger. According to the Standard Version of Act-Consequentialism, an action is wrong if and only if it has an alternative whose consequences would be intrinsically better. Case One challenges the Standard Version because there does not seem to be such an alternative to my action: Victim would have died by your shot if I had not shot him, and similar remarks apply to your action. The dissertation is structured as follows. After Chapter One, which briefly introduces the main issues of the dissertation, I turn to Chapter Two – “Preliminaries” – where I outline the Standard Version and highlight the main characteristics of over-determination cases. These cases are divided into cases of redundant difference making and cases of redundant causation. Cases of redundant causation are subdivided further into cases of causal over-determination and pre-emption. I make an important stipulation in this chapter. I say that our actions in Case One and similar cases are “redundant negative difference makers.” In Chapter Three – “Replies” – I consider whether the proponent of Act-Consequentialism might question the intuition that you and I, respectively, act wrongly in Case One. The proponent might accept that we have this intuition but explain it away, or she might deny that we have the intuition and instead point to something else that is wrong in this kind of case. For example, she could suggest that although neither you nor I act wrongly individually, we act wrongly together. I argue that these replies are problematic.  For instance, explaining away this intuition might also force us to explain away intuitions that support the Standard Version. In Chapter Four – “Causal Consequences” – I discuss an alternative version of Act-Consequentialism that might seem to fare better. The Standard Version interprets the term “outcome of an action” as referring to the entire possible world that would obtain, if the action were performed. The version I have in mind, the “Causal Consequences Version of Act-Consequentialism,” understands “outcome of an action” as instead referring to the causal consequences of the action. It seems clear that you and I, respectively, cause the state of affairs that Victim dies in Case One. However, I show that the Causal Consequences Version has a number of unattractive implications. In Chapter Five – “the Non-Standard Version” – I suggest another alternative version of Act-Consequentialism. This version – the Non-Standard Version – implies that you and I act wrongly in Case One. Roughly, the Non-Standard Version says that an action is wrong if and only if it has an alternative whose consequences would be intrinsically better, or is a redundant negative difference maker. The Non-Standard Version is similar to a principle suggested by Derek Parfit. However, I shall argue that the Non-Standard Version is preferable to Parfit’s principle. In Chapter Six – “Further Cases” – I discuss a number of cases that challenge the Non-Standard Version. For example, what would the Non-Standard Version imply in a case very similar to Case One but where I would have killed another person, if I had not shot Victim? I argue that the Non-Standard Version handles this and other problematic cases, and that it is therefore a plausible alternative to the Standard Version.

Le physicalisme explique scientifiquement le problème de la conscience et peut se définir comme étant le problème résiduel de toutes les tentatives de réduction. Le physicalisme, dès lors, doit-il être toujours considéré comme la position métaphysique dominante et comme la méthodologie incontournable de toute théorie de la conscience ? Les tenants d’un physicalisme matérialiste radical réfutent le caractère irréductible du ressenti de conscience sur les processus neurobiolologiques. Cependant, éliminer la réalité idéelle du ressenti subjectif de l’expérience consciente semble n’aboutir qu’à l’échec du physicalisme dans sa vision matérialiste radicale car la seule analyse structurelle et perceptuelle des caractères phénoménaux d’un organisme ne peut traiter de manière explicite le caractère subjectif de l’expérience consciente. Les philosophes non réductionnistes et les dualistes postulent, donc, le dépassement du physicalisme à travers un néo-dualisme moderne. Dès lors, le ressenti de conscience doit-il être considéré comme un simple dépassement du physicalisme ou devons-nous le considérer comme étant au-delà du physicalisme ? La question essentielle qui se posera tout au long de notre thèse sur le ressenti de conscience est de savoir pourquoi le ressenti de conscience existe et pas seulement comment il existe ? Le pourquoi du ressenti de conscience nous entraine à travers le rôle imparti dans l’émergence de la conscience que représente le fossé explicatif physico-psychique sur ce que l’on nomme le « hard problem of consciousness ». / Physicalism scientifically explains the problem of consciousness and can be defined as the residual problem of all attempts of reduction. So, can physicalism always be considered as the supreme metaphysical stance and the unavoidable methodology of all theory of consciousness ? The supporters of a radical materialistic methodology deny the ireductible character of the perception of consciousness. So, they rule out any mental causality and any dualist vision of consciousness through the elimination of the perception of consciousness as a conscious experience and they argue that any physical effect is only terminated by the physical aspect.However, ruling out the ideal reality from the subjective perception seems only to result in the failure of physicalim in its radical materialistic vision, because the structural and perceptual of the phenomenal characters of an organism only cannot explicitly deal with the subjective character of a conscious experience.The non reductionist philosophers and the dualists assume the concept exceeding of physicalism through a modern neo-dualism. The basic issue of our dissertation is to know why the perception of consciousness exists and not only why it exists. The reasons of the perception of consciousness carries us, through the part played in the emergence of consciousness by the physico-psychic explanatory gap, to what is called "the hard problem of consciousness".So, in our dissertation, we shall try to rebut the conclusions of eliminativist physicalism and assume the emergence of the dualism of properties and a modern neo-dualism through the two key questions.

In this thesis, the in-duct experimental methods for determining aeroacoustic N-ports of in-duct elements are discussed and improved. The scattering matrix determination methods and the related wave decomposition methods are evaluated from measurements in an empty duct carrying a mean flow. The improvements of a new over-determination method for the source part of the N-port is studied using simulations and measurements; in quiescent air as well as measurements of the flow associated noise of a mixer plate, here a triangular plate inserted at an angle in a duct. The new method is shown to improve suppression of random errors while no improvement is achieved for bias errors.   Further, the methods are applied in the study of two different aeroacoustic phenomena; one is the effect on the flow associated noise of the triangular plate achieved by varying the bending stiffness. For the most resilient plate tested, it is observed that when the Strouhal number of the flow noise coalesce with the Helmholtz number of a specific eigen-mode of the plate, the noise is drastically dampened. There is also a weaker broad band effect.   The other phenomena studied is the amplification and attenuation obtained for sound waves propagating in a T-junction of rectangular ducts. It is found that by adding only 10% of inflow in the side branch relative to that in the main branch, the amplification is heavily increased. By adding another 10% the amplification is again similar to that of no side branch flow. Adding further flow lessens the effects still. / QC 20101118 / Experimental characterization of aero-acoustic sources

La notion de cause est l’alpha et l’oméga de l’Éthique. Mais elle apparaît principalement de manière oblique : à travers « l’idée d’une cause extérieure » qui accompagne les passions dérivées. La cause, imaginée de façon assignable, n’est en fait plus assignable. L’individu étant complexe, il est difficile de démêler ce qui lui arrive de l’extérieur, de ce qui est produit par l’intérieur. Dans la passion, on se modifie à son insu pour devenir un sujet de ce qui lui arrive, et comprend la cause de ce changement sous la forme d’un récit. Cette dynamique imaginaire, nous l’appelons « causalité imaginaire » et nous l’expliquons en termes mécaniques. Nous dégageons d’abord l’essentiel de la mécanique spinoziste : la positivité ontologique de chaque idée (nature agissante) ; la multiplicité des référentiels qui se croisent en une seule et même nature (enveloppement) ; et le concept d’individu originairement composé (emboîtement des individus). La coexistence de ces référentiels autour d’un seul, voilà ce qui constitue la structure de la causalité imaginaire, et la variation de leur proportion, son contenu effectif. Conformément à cette structure, nous appliquons le « conatus », principe d’autoconservation, en premier aux idées ou affects, pour montrer que le désir, essence actuelle de l’homme, est un complexe d’affects qui, individus eux-mêmes, médiatisent l’influence des autres. Il en résulte que la causalité imaginaire est la causalité mécanique elle-même, relative aux individus complexes. Enfin, tout en nous référant à la causalité psychique freudienne, nous tentons d’esquisser un nouveau concept d’Inconscient, comme rapport sans sujet ou structure sans centre. / The notion of cause is the alpha and omega of Ethics. But it appears mostly in an oblique way: through "the idea of ​​an external cause" that accompanies the derived passions. The cause, imagined assignable, is actually no more assignable. As the individual is complex, it is difficult to disentangle what is happening in it from the exterior, from what is produced by the interior. In passion, one is modified unwittingly to become a subject of what happens to him, and understand the cause of this change under the form of a story. This imaginary dynamics, I call it "imaginary causality" and explain it in mechanical terms. I establish first the key features of Spinoza’s mechanics: the ontological positivity of each idea (acting nature); the multiplicity of referential frames that intersect at a single nature (envelopment); and the concept of the individual as originally composed (nesting individuals). The coexistence of these referential frames around only one of them, this is precisely what constitutes the structure of imaginary causality, and the variation of their proportion, its actual content. In accordance with this structure, I apply "conatus", self-preservation principle, to ideas or affects at first, to show that desire, actual essence of a man, is a complex of affects which, as individuals themselves, mediate the influence of others. It turns out that imaginary causality is the very mechanical causality, concerning the complex individuals. Finally, while I refer to Freudian psychic causality, I attempt to outline a new concept of the unconscious: as relation without a subject or structure without a center.