Alberto Gualandi

Au delà des différences de terminologie et de background culturel, on essaye ici de montrer que le physicien quantique David Bohm et le philosophe poststructuraliste Gilles Deleuze ont visé un but de pensée commun: remplacer l’image classique de la réalité, encore dominante à notre époque, par une métaphysique finalement en accord avec les concepts et les résultats de la relativité, de la mécanique quantique et de la biologie contemporaine. Pour ces deux penseurs, le monde des choses bien individuées dans l’espace et le temps, et ordonnées selon des relations mécaniques de cause et d’effet, n’est rien d’autre que l’expression momentanée d’une “Totalité indivise en devenir” qui en constitue le véritable fondement ontologique. Par le moyen de cette nouvelle métaphysique, le monde de l’expérience quotidienne et de la science classique apparaît comme la manifestation explicite ou développée de l’ordre implicite que la totalité indivise contient virtuellement en elle à des niveaux d’enveloppement et d’imbrication toujours plus profonds. Le monde explicite est le résultat d’un processus de répétition, ralentissement et stabilisation temporelle, déclenché par l’interaction de nos instruments de mesure – appareils techniques, organes sensoriels et moteurs, formes a priori et catégories de l’entendement – avec une totalité mouvante dont le sujet pensant et observant représente un reflet momentané et partial plutôt qu’un fragment solitaire et autonome. En critiquant l’image classique de la correspondance/adéquation entre l’être et la pensée, Bohm et Deleuze montrent enfin que la pensée qui veut saisir cette Totalité en devenir interagit inévitablement avec elle, en la modifiant, en la recréant, en l’accomplissant dans une direction plutôt qu’une autre. La pensée ressemble ainsi à une danse qui essaye de s’harmoniser avec le flux universel qui l’engendre et l’emporte dans un seul mouvement avec la matière.

The contributions included in this section of S&F_ focus on the problem of the epistemological status of psychoanalysis and its object, the unconscious. They were originally presented in Venice at the Ca’ Foscari University in December 2014, during a debate organized by Maria Turchetto and the Associazione Louis Althusser, following the first Italian translation of the two conferences on psychoanalysis delivered by Althusser at the École Normale in 1963‐64. The two conferences, centred around the alleged “epistemological break” brought about by the work of Lacan in the domain of human sciences, provide the authors with the opportunity to examine the relationship between Marxism, psychoanalysis and philosophy in the current theoretical context, and to address such problems as the relationship between the discourse of the unconscious and the theory of ideology, transindividual imaginary and subjective Cogito, body and language, as well as the status of scientific truth. The authors attempt to show the fecundity of an epistemological approach which allows us to reposition the problem of the unconscious in an “interstitial gap” separating body from language, phenomenology from biology, corporeal linguistic signifier from the pure axiomatic of science.

The recent studies devoted to the special role that auditory hallucinations plays in schizophrenic syndrome open up new perspectives on the problem of the origin of language. Highlighting the interplay of biological and cultural evolutionary conditions which served as a background to the emergence and affirmation of the audio ‐ vocal language, this studies activate a variety of disciplines that converge synergistically in a new image of the hominization process and of the role that the phono‐ auditory system – and related phenomena such as brain lateralization – have played in the “construction” of the human body and mind. Comparing some recent phenomenological and neurobiological theories of auditory hallucinations, we will attempt to identify a middle path that, through the aesthesiological description of the structural characteristics of the phono ‐ auditory modality, allow to shed new light on the evolutionary advantages and risks associated with the acquisition of spoken language.

Over and above differences in terminology and cultural background, we try to show that the quantum physicist, David Bohm, and poststructuralist philosopher, Gilles Deleuze, shared a common aim in thought: to replace the classical image of reality, which is still dominant in our time, with a metaphysics finally in agreement with the concepts and results of relativity, quantum mechanics andcontemporary biology. For these two thinkers, the world of things that are well individuated in space and time, and ordered according to mechanical relations of cause and effect, are nothing but the momentary expression of an “undivided wholeness in flowing movement” that constitutes its true ontological ground. By means of this new metaphysics, the world of daily experience and classical science appears as the explicit manifestation or development of implicate order that undivided wholeness contains virtually in itself at deeper and deeper levels of envelopment and imbrication. The explicit world is the result of a process of repetition, deceleration and temporal stabilization, triggered by the interaction of our measuring instruments – technical devices, sensory organs and motors, a priori forms and categories of the understanding – with moving wholeness, the thinking and observing subject of which represents a momentary and partial reflection rather than a solitaryand autonomous fragment. By criticizing the classical image of thecorrespondence/adequation of being and thought, Bohm and Deleuzeshow that the thought seeking to grasp this wholeness in flowingmovement inevitably interacts with it – by modifying, recreating andaccomplishing it in one direction rather than another. Thought thusresembles a dance that tries to harmonize with the universal flux thatgenerates and carries it away in a single movement with matter. ***************************************************************************************************************************Para além das diferenças de terminologia e de background cultural, tenta-se aqui mostrar que o físico quântico David Bohm e o filósofo pós-estruturalista Gilles Deleuze tiverem um objetivo comum de pensamento: substituir a imagem clássica da realidade, ainda dominante em nossa época, por uma metafísica finalmente de acordo com os conceitos e resultados da relatividade, da mecânica quântica e da biologia contemporânea. Para estes dois pensadores, o mundo das coisas bem individuadas no espaço e no tempo, e ordenadas conforme as relações mecânicas de causa e efeito, não é nada outro que a expressão momentânea de uma “Totalidade indivisa em devir” que constitui seu verdadeiro fundamento ontológico. Pelo meio desta nova metafisica, o mundo da experiência cotidiana e da ciência clássica aparece como a manifestação explicita ou desenvolvida da ordem implícita que a totalidade indivisa contém virtualmente nela mesma em níveis de envolvimento e de imbricação sempre mais profundos. O mundo explícito é o resultado de um processo de repetição, desaceleração e estabilização temporal, desencadeado pela interação de nossos instrumentos de medição -- aparelhos técnicos, órgãos sensoriais e motores, formas “a priori” e categorias do entendimento – com uma totalidade movente no qual o sujeito pensante e observante representa um reflexo momentâneo e parcial ao invés de um fragmento solitário e autônomo. Ao criticar a imagem clássica da correspondência/adequação entre o ser e o pensamento, Bohm e Deleuze mostram finalmente que o pensamento que intenta capturar esta Totalidade em devir interage inevitavelmente com ela, modificando-a, recriando-a e realizando-a em uma direção ao invés de outra. O pensamento se aparenta assim a uma dança que tenta se harmonizar com o flux universal que o gera e o leva em um movimento só com a matéria.Palavras-chave: Bohm; Deleuze; totalidade indivisa em devir; física quântica; pós-estruturalismo; ontologia.

De quelle façon la philosophie française du XXème siècle s'est-elle confrontée à la science? La philosophie française a-t-elle élaboré un rapport à la science qui la différencie des autres traditions nationales de pensée - des traditions allemande et anglo-saxonne par exemple? Et ce rapport singulier à la science, quelles conséquences a t-il pour la pensée si on considère la philosophie à l'horizon de ses enjeux les plus vastes? Quelles conséquences en dérivent pour la pensée de l'art, de la politique, de l'homme et de la société contemporaine?

O filósofo francês Jean-François Lyotard (1924-1998) ocupa hoje um lugar de destaque na história da filosofia do século XX. Autor de mais de trinta livros traduzidos em uma dezena de línguas, ganhou grande projeção internacional com o lançamento da obra A condição pós-moderna, em 1979. De lá para cá, inúmeros debates e reflexões passaram a se referir e usar a expressão pós-moderno. Lyotard foi militante de Socialismo ou Barbárie, grupo de extrema esquerda anti-stalinista, e participou politicamente do Maio de 68, na França. Filósofo artista, vindo da fenomenologia e do marxismo, soube aprender com pintores, escritores, músicos e cientistas. Juntamente com outros grandes nomes das últimas décadas, Lyotard abordou, de forma profunda e crítica, as conseqüências do pós-modernismo nas relações sociais.

Highlighting the link that connects the philosophy of history and institutions developed by Urmensch with the biological categories set out in Der Mensch, this work attempts to reconstruct the main social, cultural and institutional stages of human history in the light of two interconnected principles: the biological principle of exaptation, and the principle, derived from the idealistic tradition, of indirect self-consciousness [indirektes Selbstbewusstsein]. The result is a materialist conception of human history in which, however, the main social and cultural institutions – from the rituals of hunting to totemism, from the great monotheistic religions to the experimental practice of modern science – do not appear as mere superstructural effects of different «socio-economic formations», but as «transcendental schemes» that interconnect action and perception, reality and need, necessity and convention, norm and emotion. This conception allows to throw new light on post-histoire, on the postmodern era in which the techno-scientific institution dominate any other form of institutional mediation, transforming the metainstitution of language into an instrument of manipulation of internal and external reality. Neutralizing any means to satisfy the most essential needs, which is communication, humanity is thus exposed to the greatest danger: an era where social autism seems no longer possible to be cured