Alan Sokal has questioned the postmodern assertion that 'science is ... a "myth'', a "narration" ... a "social construction'" (1998: x). This dissertation examines his reasons for rejecting this allegedly postmodern declaration. Firstly, it suggests that the basis for Sol'1ll's contention that a 'true' world exists beyond one's awareness of it extends to an attack on modem philosophy, and is not limited to its postmodern component. Then, it describes defences of the 'linguistic construction' of science as thinly veiled attempts at emulating scientific discourses. In a more speculative vein, the dissertation goes on to evaluate claims made against science in terms of its connection to warfare; its insensitivity to mythology, and its generally misdirected values. It is in terms of value that the dissertation detects an analogous relationship between the discourses of mythology and science. Finally, a playful 'postmodern' reading is attempted of Sol'1ll's use of fiction in establishing the truth of his assertions. / English Studies / M.A.(English)

This dissertation is generally concerned with Plato's conception of philosophy, as the conception is ascertainable from the Republic and certain ‘post-Republic' dialogues. It argues that philosophy, according to Plato, is multi-disciplinary; that ‘philosophy' does not mark off just one art or science; that there are various philosophers corresponding to various philosophical sciences, all of which come together under a common aim: betterment of self through intellectual activity. A major part of this dissertation is concerned with Plato's science par excellence, ‘the science of dialectic' (he epistêmê dialektikê). The science of dialectic is distinguished in Plato by being concerned with Forms or Kinds as such; the science of dialectic, alone amongst the philosophical sciences, fully understands what it means for Form X to be a Form. I track the science of dialectic, from its showcase in Republic VI and VII, and analyze its place in relation to the other philosophical sciences in certain post-Republic dialogues. Ultimately, I show that, whilst it is not the only science constituting philosophy, Plato's science of dialectic represents the intellectual zenith obtainable by man; the expert of this science is the topmost philosopher. In this dissertation I also argue that Socrates, as variously depicted in these dialogues, always falls short of being identified as the philosopher par excellence, as that expert with positive knowledge of Forms as such. Yet I also show that, far from being in conflict, the elenctic Socrates and the philosopher par excellence form a complementary relationship: the elenctic philosopher gets pupils to think about certain things in the right way prior to sending them off to work with the philosopher par excellence.

The Philosophers such as ibn-Sina had maintained that time and space were co-eternal with Allah, emanating by necessity from His Attributes, and not being the results of a deliberate act of creation. This must be the case, for otherwise nothing would have been present to induce Him to create the world after a period of non-existence. Al-Ghazali's refutation of this is that Allah had decreed in pre-eternity that the world would materialize at a future, predetermined date, selecting an instance for its birth from a myriad like-instances by exercising His Free Will and manifesting therewith a cause with a delayed effect. The Philosophers' explanation of local phenomena as resulting from the perpetual motion of the spheres is flawed, since perpetual celestial motions would result in perpetual, not transient phenomena. Time, the measure of motion, does not extend beyond the physical realm. Time, and hence motion, is finite. / Religious Studies and Arabic / M.A. (Ancient Languages & Cultures)

Les philosophes français des Lumières se sont évertués, notamment dans la deuxième moitié du XVIIIe siècle, à préciser les cas où l’inégalité et les limites de la liberté seraient conformes aux lois naturelles afin de proposer les préceptes permettant une vie sociale épanouie. Ce faisant, ils ouvrirent la voie à la formation des absolutismes éclairés qui trouvent leurs racines juridiques dans la théorie du droit naturel. Elaborée pour une large part par Voltaire qui la mettait directement en relation avec l’idéologie des absolutismes « classiques », l’idéologie des absolutismes éclairés avait pour but principal la création d’un Etat fort. Ayant accepté les propositions des philosophes les « rois philosophes » ou « monarques éclairés » fondèrent les justificatifs d’une telle politique sur la langue, la mode, et surtout sur la confiance dans un progrès que la France avait su promouvoir. / The French philosophers of the Age of Enlightenment, especially in the second part of the eighteenth century, endeavoured to specify the cases in which inequality and the limitations of freedom would be in accordance with natural laws in order to propose precepts for a blossoming life. By doing so, they opened the way to the formation of enlightened absolutism, a model of government that finds its legal foundations in the Natural Law Theory Developed largely part by Voltaire, who put it in the direct relation with the ideology of “classical” absolutism, the ideology of enlightened absolutism had as its principal goal the creation of a strong state. Having embraced the philosophers’ precepts, the “enlightened monarchs” or “philosopher kings” founded the evidence of such a policy on language, fashion, and especially on the confidence in a progress that France had been able to promote.

Matěj Novotný - Impiety in Classical Athens Abstract The thesis discusses the definition and prosecution of impiety in democratic Athens during the Classical period, i.e. in 5th-4th centuries BCE. The question of "impiety" in the narrower sense, i.e. of what was denoted by the Greek word ἀσέβεια (literally, "the absence/negation of respect"), is set into larger context of other crimes of religious character, covered by special laws: "sacrilege" (ἱεροσυλία), digging out sacred olive-trees, offences against festivals and other delicts which were not subsumed under any more general term in the laws, pragmatically formulated as they were. The dissertation builds on the work of the researchers who show considerable scepticism towards the reliability of later sources, for example Plutarch or Diogenes Laertius - this is connected with doubts concerning processes against philosophers before Socrates. At the same time, the thesis follows the scholars who doubt the authenticity of the documents inserted in the speeches of the Attic Orators. For these reasons, a considerable part of the thesis is devoted to the rebuttal of late reports and inserted documents. A particular attention is given to the Decree of Diopeithes, which is mentioned in Plutarch's Life of Pericles and is usually interpreted as criminalising...

The Philosophers such as ibn-Sina had maintained that time and space were co-eternal with Allah, emanating by necessity from His Attributes, and not being the results of a deliberate act of creation. This must be the case, for otherwise nothing would have been present to induce Him to create the world after a period of non-existence. Al-Ghazali's refutation of this is that Allah had decreed in pre-eternity that the world would materialize at a future, predetermined date, selecting an instance for its birth from a myriad like-instances by exercising His Free Will and manifesting therewith a cause with a delayed effect. The Philosophers' explanation of local phenomena as resulting from the perpetual motion of the spheres is flawed, since perpetual celestial motions would result in perpetual, not transient phenomena. Time, the measure of motion, does not extend beyond the physical realm. Time, and hence motion, is finite. / Religious Studies and Arabic / M.A. (Ancient Languages & Cultures)

Alan Sokal has questioned the postmodern assertion that 'science is ... a "myth'', a "narration" ... a "social construction'" (1998: x). This dissertation examines his reasons for rejecting this allegedly postmodern declaration. Firstly, it suggests that the basis for Sol'1ll's contention that a 'true' world exists beyond one's awareness of it extends to an attack on modem philosophy, and is not limited to its postmodern component. Then, it describes defences of the 'linguistic construction' of science as thinly veiled attempts at emulating scientific discourses. In a more speculative vein, the dissertation goes on to evaluate claims made against science in terms of its connection to warfare; its insensitivity to mythology, and its generally misdirected values. It is in terms of value that the dissertation detects an analogous relationship between the discourses of mythology and science. Finally, a playful 'postmodern' reading is attempted of Sol'1ll's use of fiction in establishing the truth of his assertions. / English Studies / M.A.(English)

Marmontel, écrivain bien connu de son temps et aujourd’hui presque oublié, a produit une œuvre diverse et abondante dont l’unité est analysée dans ce travail. L’œuvre de ce polygraphe est prise en compte, dans une perspective littéraire et historique. Son parcours intellectuel est d’abord mis en rapport avec le portrait de l’honnête homme, écrivain mondain et agent d’influence que façonnèrent ses Mémoires. En deuxième lieu, sa position au sein de la République des Lettres est réévaluée, depuis ses postulats théoriques (poétique et esthétique) jusqu’à leur application pratique (réécritures, traductions, relations avec Voltaire, avec « le mouvement encyclopédique » et avec ses adversaires). Enfin, les relations de Marmontel et de son public sont explorées. L’étude de sa poésie et de ses Contes moraux permet de déterminer dans quelle mesure l’œuvre de cet écrivain fut modelée par son dessein de faire carrière et adaptée au public qu’il visait. Ce travail a pour but de changer la perspective généralement adoptée dans les études consacrées à Marmontel, en montrant qu’il n’est pas seulement un reflet de son époque mais qu’il a pu l’influencer, à sa manière, en retour. / Marmontel, a well-known writer in his time – but almost unremembered nowadays – created a diverse and profuse work which unity is being recovered here. This versatile writer’s work is taken into account through a literary and historical angle. His intellectual journey is being connected to the portrait of the honest man, worldly author, and leverage agent, which were built up in his Memoirs. Furthermore, his place within the Republic of Letters is being reappraised, from his theoretical (poetic, and aesthetic) postulates to their practical implementation (rewriting, translating, interactions with Voltaire and with the “encyclopedia school”, as well as with his opponents). Finally, Marmontel’s relationships with his audience are being examined. The study of his poetry and his Moral Tales allows us to establish to what extent his writings were shaped by his design to succeed and adapted to the audience he targeted. This work aims to change the perspective generally adopted in the studies devoted to Marmontel, by showing that not only was he a reflection of his times, but he also managed, in return, to influence his age, in his own way.

Doctorat en philosophie et lettres / info:eu-repo/semantics/nonPublished

La thèse comprend deux parties, qui visent à vérifier deux hypothèses principales.<p>La première consiste à se demander si la déconstruction derridienne de la métaphysique traditionnelle ne joue pas, au su ou à l’insu de Derrida, un double rôle :d’une part, délimiter les prétentions de ladite métaphysique à révéler et/ou à livrer la présence pleine du sens ou de la vérité et, d’autre part, constituer le fondement de la logique de la différance. Celle-ci, posée comme ‘’principe des principes’’ de la pensée de Derrida, jouerait un rôle unificateur de son œuvre, en dépit de l’argument commun aux disciples de l’impossibilité de fixer son travail en aucune forme d’unité. Derrida n’est-il pas, soutient-on, le penseur de la fragmentation, à l’opposé de Heidegger qui, lui serait le philosophe du rassemblement ?<p>Contrairement à cette thèse, nous posons la différance comme tissu de l’unité de fond sans fond de l’œuvre de Derrida ou, plus précisément, comme clef interprétative obligée permettant d’aborder son travail sous la forme d’une unité en différance et fragmentée. La différance commanderait ainsi l’ensemble de l’œuvre de Derrida comme une sorte de logique non-logique à l’œuvre, partout et toujours déjà, active dans chaque champ de son déploiement. Au lieu de constituer un auxiliaire à la déconstruction, la différance en commanderait la genèse et l’économie.<p>Notre seconde hypothèse repose sur l’idée que la différance, érigée en logique non logique, déborderait le contexte et le champ de recherche que lui assignerait son auteur. De sorte qu’il deviendrait possible de la mettre en dialogue avec la révolution linguistico-pragmatique pour, d’une part décloisonner le terrain de la théorie du performatif et des speech acts et, d’autre part, envisager une transgression de ladite révolution par des thématiques dont elle revendiquerait l’exclusivité en montrant qu’elle reste incapable d’en rendre rigoureusement compte. L’incapacité de la révolution linguistico-pragmatique à rendre compte, par exemple, de la pratique de l’événement sous forme de la promesse à la fois possible et impossible, du don de rien, du pardon sans demande ni repentir, de l’hospitalité inconditionnelle offerte et donnée à/par l’étranger en tant qu’arrivant en général, de la décision impossible, en un mot de la responsabilité incalculable sous le régime de l’aporie, témoignerait de sa restance dans l’orbite du logocentrisme ou, simplement, de la logique identitaire de tout ou rien. Il appert ainsi que la volonté affichée par ce tournant de dépasser la métaphysique traditionnelle tourne à l’échec, à telle enseigne que seule la prise en compte de la logique non oppositionnelle de la différance présenterait une alternative nouvelle. Cette dernière serait de nature non seulement à déconstruire la métaphysique de la présence et à délimiter les prétentions du Linguistic-turn mais aussi à tracer la voie vers une praxis de la responsabilité non réductrice, encore moins répressive de l’incommensurable altérité de l’autre, voire de son autre, en général.<p>La question reste ouverte de savoir si Derrida peut être considéré comme un ‘’métaphysicien’’ à la recherche du dépassement de la métaphysique et de tout ce qui pourrait s’y rattacher ou un philosophe de l’action tendant à subvertir la morale, au moyen de la différance, en vue d’une nouvelle praxis.<p> / Doctorat en philosophie et lettres, Orientation philosophie / info:eu-repo/semantics/nonPublished