Marie-Josée Lavallée

Abstract. — This article argues that the reading of Plato has had an influence on the development of Hannah Arendt’s (1906-1975) political philosophy. It sketches H. Arendt’s profile of the “political Plato” and shows how Plato’s philosophy inspired H. Arendt’s philosophical project. It pays a special attention to the subject of totalitarianism. It shows that H. Arendt’s reading was greatly influenced by the ideological interpretations of Plato of the 1930’s and 1940’s, and by the work and the method of interpretation developed by Martin Heidegger. Résumé. — Cet article pose que la lecture de Platon a influencé le développement de la philosophie politique d’Hannah Arendt (1906-1975). Il esquisse le profil du « Platon politique » arendtien et met en lumière les inspirations que l’oeuvre platonicienne a insufflées au projet philosophique d’H. Arendt, en portant une attention particulière au thème du totalitarisme. Il démontre que la lecture d’H. Arendt a été fortement influencée par les interprétations idéologiques de Platon des années 1930 et 1940, et par les travaux et la méthode d’interprétation développée par Martin Heidegger.

ABSTRACT: The concept of the “banality of evil,” put forward by Hannah Arendt to describe the psychological profile of the Nazi criminal in Eichmann in Jerusalem, is intimately tied to her reading of Plato. In Arendt’s examination of the question of evil, she found some support in Kant’s philosophy. However, the problem of guilt under Nazism ultimately goes back to an inability to think. The two-in-one, a concept which describes the activity of thinking, is based on Plato’s dialogues. An examination of these philosophical sources contributes to the understanding of the possibilities and the limits of Arendt’s reflection on evil. RÉSUMÉ : Le concept de banalité du mal, proposé par Hannah Arendt pour décrire le profil psychologique du criminel nazi dans Eichmann in Jerusalem, est intimement lié à ses lectures de Platon. Pour aborder la question du mal, elle a découvert des appuis chez Kant, mais le problème de la culpabilité sous le régime nazi renvoie ultimement au défaut de penser. Le deux-en-un, concept qui décrit la pensée, a été défini sur la base de l’oeuvre platonicienne. L’examen de ces sources philosophiques permet de mieux comprendre les possibilités et les limites de la réflexion arendtienne sur le mal.

This study analyzes in depth Hannah Arendt's enduring dialogue with Plato's philosophy and maps its impacts on major arendtian themes like totalitarianism, philosophy, political action and evil. Arendt's understanding and uses of Plato's work have been influenced by various intellectual, contextual and philosophical sources which the book also brings into light, like Heidegger's studies on Plato and the afterwar debates surrounding Plato's reputation as forefather of totalitarianism, which resulted from the ideological appropriations of his political thought in Germany between the 1920s and 1940s.

La thématique de ce recueil collectif consacré à l' esprit démocratique est mise à l' enseigne du célèbre discours de Benjamin Constant comparant, au nom de l'idéal démocratique, la liberté politique des Anciens et celle qui se décline chez les Modernes. Comme le résume Jean-Marc Narbonne dans l'une de ses conférences : « Dans une démocratie directe [...] la nécessité du sacrifice des intérêts privés au profit du service à la collectivité peut faire craindre la disparition ou l' effacement des aspirations personnelles ; dans une démocratie indirecte, plus encline à promouvoir la poursuite individuelle du bonheur et les bénéfices parti-culiers, c' est en revanche l'intérêt pour la chose publique en général qui risque de faire défaut [...] et qu'il s' agit de préserver. » Pour éviter ce double danger, à savoir l' embrigadement de l'individu d'un côté, la dislocation du lien social de l' autre, il faut combiner et maintenir fermement ensemble, comme le réclamait Constant lui-même, ces deux formes de liberté. Les contributions composant ce premier recueil des Cahiers Verbatim questionnent les liens objectifs entre la démocratie antique et nos démocraties modernes et l'influence, oui ou non déterminante, de celle-là sur ces dernières. LIBERTÉ DES ANCIENS, LIBERTÉ DES MODERNES

This paper paints a historical-philosophical survey of some sources of Thomas More's Utopia by considering the content and the form of his narrative, which inspired for centuries thinking and dreaming about what a good society would look like. This essay intends contributing to clarify the intentions of its author, which remained debated until our time. More's book reflects a wide range of ancient and modern influences, while some particularities of his nararative go back to his quarrels with the intellectual and theological milieus during his lifetime and to his friendship and intellectual relationship with Erasmus. The Christian background of Utopia is especially important.

This paper explores the theoretical positions of Hannah Arendt, Theodor W. Adorno, and Herbert Marcuse on revolution and the issue of social and political change. A close reading of their main writings and of a selection of posthumously published materials like conferences, discussions, drafts, and letters, testifies that their reflections on revolution must be read as a “dialogue” with the experience of the October Revolution. These thinkers offer a comprehensive analysis of the reasons for the failure of the first successful revolution of the twentieth century to bring about social justice, equality and freedom, on the one hand, by considering the empirical conditions in which the seizure of power occurred, and those which determined the subsequent development of the Soviet state, on the other hand, by considering the role of theory and the weight of ideology whose roots are to be found in Marxian, Marxist and Leninist precepts and ideas. The first part of this chapter will be devoted to these diagnoses. The shadow of October obviously hangs over Arendt’s, Adorno’s, and Marcuse’s pondering of the prospects for revolution. They had to base their thinking on new empirical and theoretical bases in order to avoid the pitfall of October. However, this historical experience was not devoid of inspiring elements, which they borrowed and reshaped after their own fashion. The second section of this paper will explore these conceptions of revolution, which remain enlightening today.

This paper explores the theoretical positions of Hannah Arendt, Theodor W. Adorno and Herbert Marcuse on revolution and the issue of social and political change. A close reading of their main writings and of a selection of posthumously published materials like conferences, discussions, drafts, and letters, testifies that their reflections on revolution must be read as a “dialogue” with the experience of the October Revolution. These thinkers offer a comprehensive analysis of the reasons for the failure of the first successful revolution of the 20th century to bring about social justice, equality and freedom, on the one hand, by considering the empirical conditions in which the seizure of power occurred, and those which determined the subsequent development of the Soviet state, on the other hand, by considering the role of theory and the weight of ideology whose roots are to be found in Marxian, Marxist and Leninist precepts and ideas. The first part of this chapter will be devoted to these diagnoses. The shadow of October obviously hangs over Arendt’s, Adorno’s, and Marcuse’s pondering of the prospects for revolution. They had to base their thinking on new empirical and theoretical bases in order to avoid the pitfall of October. However, this historical experience was not devoid of inspiring elements, which they borrowed and reshaped after their own fashion. The second section of this paper will explore these conceptions of revolution, which remain enlightening today.