Organized by USMB's Langages, Littératures, Sociétés Etudes Transfrontalières et Internationales (LLSETI) laboratory and the Association des professeurs de philosophie de l'enseignement public, the "Science, Opinion, Société" cycle of philosophical conferences continues this Thursday, April 6 at 6pm, with the theme "De l'opinion en démocratie: de la masse au public". This lecture will take place at the Presidency of theuniversité Savoie Mont Blanc (USMB), in Chambéry. It is open to all without registration, and will be held in room 3 (27 rue Marcoz, Chambéry).
Drawing on the pragmatist philosophy of John Dewey, philosophy professor Céline Bonicco proposes to reflect on the role of opinion in democracy and how it can enliven it, provided it becomes truly public. The challenge of such a perspective is to go beyond the criticisms, well known since Plato, of the capacity of ordinary people to form relevant political judgments, without sinking into an irresponsible angelism that would grant the same value to all statements in the name of freedom of expression.
By distinguishing the public from the mass and the people, John Dewey offers a stimulating perspective for thinking about the conditions that enable citizens to define common interests, and from there to develop the skills to satisfy them. Thus, the definition of a common understanding appears to be a prerequisite for articulating participation in democratic life and the acquisition of the qualities needed to judge common affairs correctly. But a crucial question now arises: how can this common understanding emerge, and how can such common interests be defined?
This conference will be hosted by Céline Bonicco, Professor of Philosophy at the Grenoble School of Architecture.
About the "Science, Opinion, Society" cycle
Our democracy, which should be a place for the assertive conflict of opinions, has instead become the site of agonistic clashes of sensibilities that seem to have disqualified reason and reasoning. Science, which cannot be dogmatic, is often repudiated as a power, no doubt because it is used by the powers that be. Does this mean that the struggle to understand and make others understand is in vain? If methodical and reasonable skepticism is a condition for enlightenment, it cannot degenerate into negationist relativism or open the door to a deleterious obscurantism. How, then, can we create genuine forums for discussion?
LEARN MORE
- Program for the 2022-2023 philosophy lecture series
- Conference summaries
- LLSETI laboratory website
- Contact: Pascal Bouvier, member of the LLSETI laboratory and organizer of this conference series