James Steeves

In Lectures on Ideology and Utopia, Ricoeur claims that utopia can offer an adequate critique of ideology. Both contribute to the way in which a group identifies itself, with ideology providing common values and images, and utopia challenging those common values with new, imaginative alternatives for interpreting society. I relate this analysis to Ricoeur’s earlier works on text to show how using utopias tocriticize ideologies is like using a semiotic analysis of a text to disclose underlying tensions. The critical use of utopia helps to reveal underlying tensions in society and the ways that ideology conceals those tensions.Dans L’ideologie et l’utopie, Ricoeur prétend que l’utopie est en mesure d’offrir une critique adéquate de l’idéologie. L’une et l’autre -l’utopie et l’idéologie - contribuent à lafaçon dont un groupe s’identifie: l’ideologie foumit des valeurs et des images communes, alors que l’utopie remet en question ces valeurs communes à l’aide d’interprétations nouvelles et imaginatives de la société. J’etablis un parallèleentre cette analyse de Ricoeur et ses premiers ouvrages portant sur le texte afin de montrer que l’utilisation d’utopies pour critiquer l’idéologie est similaire à l’utilisation de l’analyse sémiotique pour exposer des tensions sous-jacentes d’un texte. L’utilisation critique de l’utopie contribue à révéler des tensions sous-jacentes à l’intérieur de la société et les façons dont l’ideologie dissimule ces tensions.

In Lectures on Ideology and Utopia, Ricoeur claims that utopia can offer an adequate critique of ideology. Both contribute to the way in which a group identifies itself, with ideology providing common values and images, and utopia challenging those common values with new, imaginative alternatives for interpreting society. I relate this analysis to Ricoeur’s earlier works on text to show how using utopias tocriticize ideologies is like using a semiotic analysis of a text to disclose underlying tensions. The critical use of utopia helps to reveal underlying tensions in society and the ways that ideology conceals those tensions.Dans L’ideologie et l’utopie, Ricoeur prétend que l’utopie est en mesure d’offrir une critique adéquate de l’idéologie. L’une et l’autre -l’utopie et l’idéologie - contribuent à lafaçon dont un groupe s’identifie: l’ideologie foumit des valeurs et des images communes, alors que l’utopie remet en question ces valeurs communes à l’aide d’interprétations nouvelles et imaginatives de la société. J’etablis un parallèleentre cette analyse de Ricoeur et ses premiers ouvrages portant sur le texte afin de montrer que l’utilisation d’utopies pour critiquer l’idéologie est similaire à l’utilisation de l’analyse sémiotique pour exposer des tensions sous-jacentes d’un texte. L’utilisation critique de l’utopie contribue à révéler des tensions sous-jacentes à l’intérieur de la société et les façons dont l’ideologie dissimule ces tensions.

The imagination plays a central role in Merleau-Ponty's philosophy. In his earlier works, the imagination is shown to be the creative ability of the body to have a sense of space and motility in terms of which we are able to make sense of the world. In his later works, the view that the human body is a dynamic and creative process of realizing possibilities is extended to ontology; Being is shown to be a continual dissemination of meaning through the medium of 'flesh'. Thus Merleau-Ponty's philosophy, from start to finish, is a philosophy of the imagining body. ;This thesis begins with a discussion of imagination theory in order to show that there are four kinds of imagining: perceptual imagining, aesthetic imagining, fanciful imagining, and elemental imagining. It is shown how Merleau-Ponty's philosophy of the imagination covers each kind, and how his analysis is superior to those of many other philosophers. Merleau-Ponty's theory of the body is then examined in the light of contemporary research, with an emphasis on the nature of the body schema. The body is shown to be a creative medium for engaging with the world, and to be the basis for the four kinds of imagining. Thus the imagination theory of Merleau-Ponty is a theory of the imagining body. Finally, the role of the imagining body in ontology is explored. It is shown that Being is itself dynamic and creative, and expresses itself through the medium of 'flesh'. The imagining of Being, however, finds its ultimate expression in the imagining body as it imagines itself in perception, aesthetic production, fanciful thinking and the interpretation of elemental images

"The book also amends traditional theories of imagination by suggesting a new approach to determining what it is and how it functions. The imagination is not only extended beyond the realm of fanciful thinking but is restored as being essentially spatial and embodied; there is a primacy of the imaginary within perceptual experience. Further, Steeves demonstrates a stronger connection between Merleau-Ponty's early works on the body and perception and his later works on aesthetic and social theory and on the ontology of the "flesh." Finally, Steeves answers to recent criticisms of Merleau-Ponty's work from postmodernism, deconstructionism and feminism, paving the way for a new understanding of perception and ontology."--BOOK JACKET.