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 Wednesday, March 15 at 6pm, with the theme "Pour un nouveau conflit des facultés?" ("For a new faculty conflict?"). This lecture will take place at theuniversité Savoie Mont Blanc (USMB) presidency in Chambéry. It is open to all without registration, and will be held in room 3 (27 rue Marcoz, Chambéry).
There was the "Conflict of the Faculties", in which Kant claimed freedom for the philosopher to speak out against theology, then all-powerful, but also against the reasons of Law, which in the name of political reasons could aspire to hold the upper hand alone.
Before him, Spinoza had distinguished between truth as expounded by philosophy, which based on science expounded the conditions of knowledge, and the "truncated and mutilated" truths uttered by opinion under the influence of interpreters who believed themselves to be patent.
Undoubtedly, theology can no longer claim to silence or even compete with philosophy and science, although it may still aspire to do so. Likewise, power can no longer claim to rely on Law, which speaks only of legality, to compete with the reasons of science and to challenge the problematizing enterprise of philosophy.
But today, opinions, in the name of the power that democracy allows them, are manufacturing ignorance in new ways. What weapons would a faculty of philosophy have today to roll back the pretensions of ignorance?
Martine Verlhac, Honorary Professor of Philosophy, will lead the conference.
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