La logique sociale (French Edition)

Following the publication of this book, Lefebvre wrote several influential works on cities, urbanism, and space, including The Production of Space , which became one of the most influential and heavily cited works of urban theory. By the s, Lefebvre had also published some of the first critical statements on the work of post-structuralists , especially Foucault.

Lefebvre died in In his obituary, Radical Philosophy magazine honored his long and complex career and influence:. One of Lefebvre's most important contributions to social thought is the idea of the "critique of everyday life," which he pioneered in the s. Lefebvre defined everyday life dialectically as the intersection of "illusion and truth, power and helplessness; the intersection of the sector man controls and the sector he does not control", [18] and is where the perpetually transformative conflict occurs between diverse, specific rhythms: It was the residual.

Lefebvre argued that everyday life was an underdeveloped sector compared to technology and production, and moreover that in the mid 20th century, capitalism changed such that everyday life was to be colonized—turned into a zone of sheer consumption. In this zone of everydayness boredom shared by everyone in society regardless of class or specialty, autocritique of everyday realities of boredom vs.

This was essential to Lefebvre because everyday life was where he saw capitalism surviving and reproducing itself. Without revolutionizing everyday life, capitalism would continue to diminish the quality of everyday life, and inhibit real self-expression. The critique of everyday life was crucial because it was for him only through the development of the conditions of human life—rather than abstract control of productive forces—that humans could reach a concrete utopian existence. Lefebvre's work on everyday life was heavily influential in French theory, particularly for the Situationists, as well as in politics e.

Lefebvre dedicated a great deal of his philosophical writings to understanding the importance of the production of space in what he called the reproduction of social relations of production. This idea is the central argument in the book The Survival of Capitalism , written as a sort of prelude to La Production de l'espace The Production of Space.

These works have deeply influenced current urban theory, mainly within human geography, as seen in the current work of authors such as David Harvey , Dolores Hayden , and Edward Soja , and in the contemporary discussions around the notion of spatial justice. Lefebvre is widely recognized as a Marxist thinker who was responsible for widening considerably the scope of Marxist theory, embracing everyday life and the contemporary meanings and implications of the ever-expanding reach of the urban in the western world throughout the 20th century.

Lefebvre contends that there are different modes of production of space i. Lefebvre's argument in The Production of Space is that space is a social product, or a complex social construction based on values, and the social production of meanings which affects spatial practices and perceptions. This argument implies the shift of the research perspective from space to processes of its production; the embrace of the multiplicity of spaces that are socially produced and made productive in social practices; and the focus on the contradictory, conflictual, and, ultimately, political character of the processes of production of space.

This becomes problematic when Arnauld and Nicole discuss rules of inference, since they have to force all propositions, including conditionals and disjunctives, into standard categorical forms.

Their treatment of the proposition, then, requires that subjects and predicates have unlimited complexity. Thus the Port-Royal theory provides no basic inventory of simple parts permitting a recursive analysis, as in the modern classification of variables, function or predicate symbols, and logical symbols. On the classical view the proposition has a simple organic unity from the outside and a reiterable complexity from the inside. When it comes to making judgments, the part of a proposition that represents the act of willing distinguishing a judgment from a mere conception is the copula, expressed linguistically by the verb.

The copula has two functions in a judgment: Arnauld and Nicole criticize Aristotle and other philosophers who combine the copula with features of the predicate time and subject person ; in a well-formed language there would be only one substantive verb , namely to be. Descartes thought that in judging one holds a complex idea or proposition before the mind and then affirms or denies that it corresponds to reality.

But the Port-Royal treatment of the copula raises serious problems for the accounts of negation and assertive force. Negative judgments are those expressed by sentences containing a negative word or syllable attached to the verb, and are understood as denials , or judgments having an effect opposite to affirmations.

Since in affirming one unites two ideas, in denying one separates the subject from the predicate:. If I say God is not unjust , the word is when joined to the particle not signifies the action contrary to affirming, namely denying, in which I view these ideas as repugnant to one another, because the idea unjust contains something contrary to what is contained in the idea God. In addition, this account makes it impossible to understand the force of double negation: This same problem surfaces in the Port-Royal view that the copula has assertive force, which makes it impossible to distinguish making a judgment from merely thinking a proposition.

According to the Logic , every time one connects a subject and a predicate one is ipso facto judging. Thus there is no room for thinking propositions while suspending judgment, as Descartes advocates in his method of doubt. This view of the copula also creates a problem for embedded generality.

INSTRUCTIONS AND GUIDELINES FOR AUTHORS

But some embedded clauses make assertions and some do not. Determinative subordinate clauses restrict the signification of the antecedent of the relative pronoun e. So this view of the copula again fails to distinguish complex ideas containing assertions from those that do not, showing how far Port-Royal was from a satisfactory treatment of assertion and embedded generality see Buroker In a recent article Van der Schaar amends the account given above, pointing out that although Port-Royal generally assumes the proposition has assertive force, the authors recognize deviant contexts in which this is not true.

1. Your Cloud Computing Companion (1).
2. The Adventures of Foxy the Fox.
3. Product details.
4. Subjective Morals.
5. Les économistes distingués, Logique sociale d'un champ scientifique (English)?

She draws attention to their treatment of modality Logic II. She concludes that although for Port-Royal the notion of asserted proposition is prior in the order of explanation, the authors in fact analyze some complex propositions as lacking assertive force. The Port-Royal semantics is based on a theory of the relations between words, ideas, and things. Like Descartes, Arnauld and Nicole hold that the representative relation between ideas and things is both objective and natural. Thus the idea viewed as the element of logic and knowledge is the objective content of thought.

Possibly a main subtitle (Introduction, for instance): Calibri 14 bold

And since ideas represent things, the structure of ideas is isomorphic to the structure of the real: By contrast, the relation between words and ideas is not natural, for words are conventional signs of thoughts I. Humans assign words their meaning through acts of institution. So the expressive relation between words and ideas differs in important ways from the representative relation between ideas and things. First, the relation between the linguistic sign and its idea is causal-psychological. That is, words, like natural signs, signify by prompting an idea in the perceiver's mind.

There is a second difference between linguistic and eidetic significance, namely that the correspondence between words and ideas is imperfect. Port-Royal assumes that if language coincided exactly with thought, each word would express one simple idea, and the structure of the sentence would mirror the structure of ideas.

Consequently there is no guarantee that the structure of linguistic discourse accurately reflects the structure of ideas. As this overview suggests, the semantic theory in Port-Royal is carried out on two levels, first with respect to ideas, and second with respect to language. Port-Royal first classifies ideas with respect to their objects. According to Cartesian metaphysics, there are three sorts of things: Port-Royal condenses this framework into the simpler distinction between things or substances and manners of things.

As will become apparent below, adjectives have a more complex form of signification than nouns. But at this first level the theory depends on a distinction between things, that is, complete or independent entities, and manners of things, incomplete or dependent entities. The table below gives a general sketch of the theory so far:. This treatment in some ways resembles a modern analysis of predication: The analysis also looks Fregean given the emphasis on the distinction between complete and incomplete objects of thought.

Thus Cartesian metaphysics has the resources to analyze an atomic proposition as composed of an expression for an attribute and a name of an object. But because of the subject-predicate analysis of all judgment and their semantics of general terms, the final theory is more complex. What results is a systematic confusion between names and predicates. This discussion is based on Buroker The first complication occurs in Chapter 6 of Part I, where the authors distinguish singular from general or universal ideas. Although everything that exists is singular, ideas can represent more than one thing, such as the general idea of a triangle.

The question that arises is the relation between these two ways of classifying ideas, the first in terms of complete or incomplete objects, the second into singular or general ideas. It is tempting to identify the two, but this is not easy for Port-Royal. The best way to appreciate the complexity in the theory is to use Frege's simpler theory as a point of reference.

For Frege, meaning takes place in a three-fold structure, comprised of linguistic expressions, the entities they designate or refer to, and the sense of the expression, which is a mode of presenting the entity. Despite the difference in terminology, Fregean senses function very much like ideas in Port-Royal: Frege maintains that connected to every linguistic sign there is a reference and a sense. The sense is the mode of presentation of that to which the sign refers.

Frege divides linguistic signs into three groups: Proper names and sentences are complete names; function-expressions are incomplete names. Declarative sentences also express senses—the thought contained in the sentence—and designate or refer to complete objects, namely the truth value of the sentence.

Here is a sketch of Frege's theory:. So far there is an overlap between this view and Port-Royal's theory of ideas. For Arnauld and Nicole meaning has a three-fold structure, with ideas taking the place of Fregean senses. Linguistic signs express ideas, which represent or refer to entities, either things or their attributes. Names of entities are either proper or common, depending on whether they express singular or general ideas.

If the distinction between ideas of things and ideas of attributes coincided with the distinction between singular and general ideas, the parallel with Frege would be complete. But Port-Royal actually says that general ideas represent or refer to more than one individual. On this view the reference of a general term is not an attribute, but the collection of individuals possessing the attribute.

• D'iribarne P. "La logique de l'honneur";
• The Criminal Bible - A History of Christian Imperialism (The History of Imperial Bullshit Book 5).
• Seminar 2018 - Closing words.

This is one way Port-Royal assimilates the relation of a name to its bearer with the relation of a predicate or concept-expression to the objects falling under it. Had the authors stopped here, the picture would be fairly simple. But they develop the theory in two ways. First, they contribute to the history of semantics by distinguishing the comprehension or intension of a general term from its extension denotation.

And second, they are led astray by grammatical considerations into blurring their own distinction between expressions for complete and incomplete entities.

Henri Lefebvre - Wikipedia

Medieval philosophers explained the significance of general terms by a complex theory of supposition see Spade Port-Royal condenses this framework so that the significance of general ideas has two aspects: The comprehension consists in the set of attributes essential to the idea. Here the authors confuse the species with the individual, or the relation of set inclusion with set membership. Usually, however, they take the extension of a general idea to be the individuals possessing the attributes in its comprehension.

There are three key features of this theory of signification. First, the comprehension rather than the extension is essential to the function of a general idea: Second, the comprehension governs the extension: Finally, comprehensions and extensions are inversely related. In adding attributes to the comprehension of an idea one restricts its extension assuming attributes are independent and instantiated.

Port-Royal implicitly assumes this principle throughout the text. In recognizing these two modes of signification—the comprehension and the extension—Port-Royal imports the distinction between incomplete and complete entities into the signification of general terms. Completing the theory of signification of terms is the noun system, taken largely from Part II of the Grammar.

As explained in Part II of the Logic , nouns are names of entities, that is, substances and attributes. Just as substances are ontologically prior to their manners or modes, nouns preceded adjectives in the genesis of language. Strengthening the bond with the baby improves recovery and helps the extended family keep their spirits up. On Saturday May 30th, , 9 employees from Groupe Metalogique climbed the steps of the Montmorency Falls 60 times during the Kilimandjaro Challenge.

The challenge consisted in climbing 5, meters, the equivalent of the famous African mountain. The Pignon Bleu — La maison pour grandir is a multiservice community organization engaging with children aged 0 to 12, families and jobless people in Quebec City. Located at the heart of the Saint-Sauveur area in Quebec, the Pignon Bleu is a major player in the fight against poverty in the Quebec Region.



• Archive ouverte HAL - Société d'origine et logiques migratoires : les Dogon de Sangha (Mali);
• Editorial Reviews.
• The Sabbath (Walk in the Light Book 8);
• The Mind Power Journal.
• Politiques publiques de santé, logiques d' acteurs et ordre négocié au Burkina Faso.
• Navigation?
• Certifications?

Each year, Groupe Metalogique offers a monetary contribution to help the Pignon Bleu achieve its mission. In sports-related events, Groupe Metalogique has been sponsoring the Metalogique ice canoe team since as part of the Coupe des glaces event.