Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 12

The brain and thought

Georges Canguilhem

No doubt we all like to think that we think, and many the Hippocratic treatise On the Sacred Disease (i.e.
of us would like to know how it is that we think as epilepsy). Plato took up this theory in part (notably in
we do.* It appears that the question has ceased to be the Timaeus), but it is thanks to Galen that it became
a purely theoretical one. It now seems that more and dominant in Western culture. Galen’s militant Aristot­
more of the powers that be [plus en plus de pouvoirs] elianism didn’t prevent him from performing ingenious
also take an interest in our capacity to think. If, then, experiments on the nervous system and the brain in his
we seek to understand how it is that we think as we attempt to verify the Hippocratic thesis.
do, we do this in order to protect ourselves against The question of the brain was thus originally for-
the ways – either overt or devious – in which we are mulated as a question concerning the seat of the
induced to think the way they would like us to. Indeed soul. Today’s version of the problem retained this
many people are asking questions of the manifestos put formulation over the course of the centuries and then,
forward in various political circles, and of some of the in the wake of Cartesian philosophy, gave rise to
methods of so-called behavioural psychotherapy, and a long succession of theories and polemics, which
of the reports issued by some computer com­panies. we have inherited. A brief outline of this history is
They believe they can detect in these things the pos- indispensable for determining the starting point of our
sibility of a programmed extension of techniques that investigation. This point lies in the nineteenth century,
aim, in the last analysis, to normalize thinking. To at the site of positivism’s struggle against spiritualism:
simplify things without, I think, distorting them, it may the theory of cerebral localizations.
suffice to mention one name, that of Leonid Pliouchtch, Too often this historical account is said to have
and one abbreviation, that of IBM. begun with Descartes. But this involves a total mis­
Just as biologists believed they could not speak of understanding. Descartes taught that the indivisible
the human brain without situating it at the end of a soul is joined as a whole to the body by a single organ
history of living beings, so I think it would be helpful – an organ that is the physical equivalent, so to speak,
to begin a presentation on the brain and thought by of a single point: the pineal gland (the conarion of the
situating this question within the history of culture. Ancients, our epiphysis). With Descartes there can thus
be no question of seeking to unite a divided thought
I to a federal organ. Those who later did not understand
Today, although it is common knowledge that the that the pineal gland’s function was meta-physiological
human brain is the organ of thought, we ought never- criticized Descartes, and continued to search elsewhere
theless to recall that one of Antiquity’s greatest phil- in the brain for the seat of the sensorium commune.
osophers, Aristotle, argued that the brain’s function, The list of researchers is long and stretches from Willis
in contrast to that of the heart, was to cool down the to La Peyronie. Even the invention of the guillotine
animal’s body. It was Hippocrates who argued that served as an occasion for eminent doctors – Kant’s
the brain was the seat of sensations, the organ of correspondent Soemmering, for instance – to weigh in
movements and judgements, an argument assumed in on the side of this or that theory. Pierre Cabanis (1795),

* This article was first presented as a lecture at the Sorbonne organized by the Mouvement universel pour la responsabilité
scientifique (MURS) in December 1980, and published in the journal Pro­spective et Santé 14, Summer 1980, pp. 81–98.
It was republished as the foreword to the proceedings of a conference (Actes du colloque 6–8 December 1990), Georges
Canguilhem: Philosophe, historien des sciences, Albin Michel, Paris, 1993, pp. 11–33. This translation is based on the Albin
Michel text, in which ‘the subtitles added by the journal have been removed, and the ordering of paragraphs, some of which
had been altered, has been re-established in keeping with Georges Canguilhem’s indications.’ It is translated here with the
kind permission of Bernard Canguilhem.

Radical Philosophy 148 (March/April 20 08) 

as early as 1836. the for aptitude testing. a doctor from the Hospice and his disciples argued for the innateness of moral de Bicêtre. that to understand why the first attempts to localize intel- mixture of naivety and conceit.2 Once again. in opposition to what we might today call the mental neurology to the status of philosophy. between the configuration of hemispheres means of exploring brain functions. took part in the controversy and discussed United States at the time occurred for similar reasons the case of the decapitated Charlotte Corday. ness in the anatomical substrate of an organ and not the only thing needed to make it fully complete. at the same time. front of a traditional collection of a skulls in plaster and examining the skull of a child who has been II brought in by his mother. and more particularly to the cerebral of aphasia.who argued that the brain secretes thought as the liver It has been suggested that phrenology’s success in the does bile. as it happens – and began their theories in the fields of pedagogy. missing from this physiologico-psychological system. We should as 1891 the Swiss psychiatrist Gottlieb Burckhardt con- remember. in a work called qualities and intellectual capacities. it is easy to see the possible consequences map of the brain. as the ‘seats’ of all intellectual and moral confirmed Jean-Baptists Bouillaud’s findings (Bouil- faculties. In the ulties. Franz Joseph Gall published his of psychoanalysis. Phrenology was then essentially a cranioscopy second half of the nineteenth century the use of both grounded in the correspondence between content and galvanic and faradic electricity became a privileged container. however. On the topic the encephalon. Pierre Paul Broca and Jean-Martin Charcot hemispheres. The strong point of lectual functions in the brain concerned difficulties Gall’s doctrine was the exclusivity it attributed to with speech and the memory of words. and the shape of the skull. In his Les Philosophes français au their careers. one of Daumier’s illustra. even with an localizations’. in 1810. Seen from analyse the brain’s role in the production of moral and a distance. Parallel to this research in cerebral neurology. of aptitude performing the operation that came to be known as testing (or what is today called ‘career guidance’ [ori. The Anatomy and Physiology of the Nervous System Above all. they grounded this innate. we should pay attention to entation]). In fact. Ferrier. It presented the brain. In opposition to sensualist some researchers were even inclined to elevate experi- ideology. wrote: ‘The only thing spiritualist metaphysicians. otherwise. shortly than a pale reflection of physiology. and was similar in scope to the more recent success Then. lobotomy. Half a century later. the leading thinker of this tendency was an instrument for selecting personnel and guiding Hippolyte Taine. Gall Thus. as Georges Lanteri-Laura science of psychology evolved to become little more remarked in his Histoire de la phrénologie. quickly developed into applied phrenology. acquisition of experience from the environment. which located the function system of systems’. For. that Gall and Johann Spurzheim verted topographical knowledge into psycho­surgical were already arguing for the practical applications of technique – unsuccessfully. functions was invested in techniques of intervention. past the initial obstacle that was phrenology. It is simply impossible. XIXe siècle (1854) Taine contrasted the spirit­ualist  . In fact. without further ado. the interest of this controversy might seem intellectual facts. phrenology reasons for thinking badly from that very psychology. Louis-Francisque Lélut. as the sole physical basis of the fac. of thought using modern hypotheses about the electrici- Discovery of the so-called ‘mathematics bump’1 zation or electromagnetization of the encephalic mass’ was met with widespread laughter. but in fact it wasn’t. 239). But. becoming In France. even if it still had to get underestimated. Then. to laugh away current talk about and Flechsig would inaugurate what Henri Hecaen and the chromosomes of the ‘exceptionally gifted’ or the Lanteri-Laura later called ‘the golden age of cerebral genetic and hereditary basis of IQ. is to in the ontological substantiality of a soul. of language in the frontal lobes (1825–48). unlike the Qu’est-ce que la phrénologie?. Hitzig. these days. the crucial influence that in General and the Brain in Particular. a working-class woman. Fritsch. ready. of medicine and of police work (prevention just how quickly apparent knowledge of the brain’s of delinquency). This is where phrenology had on psychopathology should not be brain science really began. however. as early of such talk at the level of social conditions. making possible the first topographic average IQ. understood as ‘the laud was a student of Gall). encouraged by a after Spurzheim and his Scottish disciple George bad-thinking [mal pensante] philosophy that drew its Combe imported it to the United States. tions for Antoine-François Hippolyte Fabre’s Némésis as if the theoretical agenda was from the beginning médicale (1840) depicts a phrenologist standing in driven by a practical interest. to explain mechanisms merely theoretical. that is to say. and even for giving matrimonial advice. but we seem less (p.

However. In 1895. Freud wrote to considered laughable: it is not accurate. well. we think rounding what he called ‘psychic topography’ [Topik in with our stomach. in the academic year of 1923–24. defended on the basis of a theory of sensation the Collège de France professor Pierre Janet3 – who like doctrine of so-called pyschophysiological parallelism. doubt it would have been easy enough to push him and even confused. According to Janet. there is … I am a man whose mind has suffered a great deal. man who is unable to live in the streets of Paris. in the chapter on the ‘Unconscious’ in chology is the science of man as a whole. who in 1927. from [cerebral localizations] a localization of mental processes. who acted like the executor of Taine’s legacy. director of the Institute not primarily psychological but first and foremost ‘a of Psychology. would probably have approved the piece of with his ego or I [moi]. Janet declared: ‘A demented man is a [The Brain and Thought]. of anti-psychiatry. in 1923.’  . This connection allows us to see in Janet’s posi- the system into Ucs. a fault in reality.’ No The brain and thought had become so closely united. wrote that fully lived experiences to the brain. in his La Pensée intérieure et ses troubles. even though the drawers will open up. for the moment. a set of devices which alter muscles affected by excitation. poets were led to attribute all responsibility for pain. is not the ligence very much. Cs) ‘has nothing to do with tion a deliberately nonconformist stance on matters anatomy’. we think with everything: we the German. after writing his more than a stupidity. De l’intelligence.’ The person in question is latter could not easily be understood as material. with our hands as well as with our brain. in Die phenomena’ concern behaviour as a whole. concerning the pathogeny and treatment of so-called To limit myself to the French domain. This stance was as anti-establishment the titles of two works from the same epoch. Alfred primacy of the cerebral we quickly become sceptical Binet furnished an essay on the nature of sensation about the effectiveness of prison-like internment as entitled l’Ame et le Corps [The Soul and the Body]. Pcs. were especially determined to refute – and – declared in one of his lectures: they did so under the disapproving eye of Théodule We have gone too far in linking psychology to the Ribot.’ today. author in 1888 of an entry on has been said about the brain: we’ve been told that the ‘Brain’ for a medical dictionary. and who as a doctor It was this doctrine that French academic philosophers. each of then as is today the stance of this or that adherent which was expressly conceived in the absence of refer. study of the brain. Antonin Artaud. the configuration but in response to a pressing preoccupation of our of the psychic topography [Topik] (the distinction of time. or at least that thought has a relation to brain functions. Then. the concept of alienation was Then. We think ‘psychic apparatus’ so as to foreground the issues sur. What we Fliess (February 1896): ‘I like Taine’s book On Intel. which is no an initial debt to Taine. published his Le Cerveau et la Pensée police matter’. call thought. every endeavour to think of representations This psychology is perhaps unjustly neglected as stored up in nerve-cells has miscarried completely. without es. having difficulties police’. acknowledged thought is a secretion of the brain. By 1915. Psy- able to write. The brain is only a set of switch- points in common with that of Freud. In 1905. as we cease to believe in the ence to any philosophical concepts. was also engaged in treating another celebrated man of the professors who taught my own professors. What we call ‘ideas’ or ‘psychological abandon­ing the topography of brain localization. wrote to Jacques Rivière: ‘All advice that some Oxford students wrote on the walls I want now is to feel my brain [sentir mon cerveau] of their university: ‘Do not adjust your mind. doctors and psychologists that even some that are demented. Freud was a student of Charcot’s. a poet and an actor. in his work of 1870. I shall recall mental illnesses. that its upper rens’s experimental brain research. he was should not separate one thing from another. Henri Piéron. This tranquil man. For almost fifty years too much Even Freud himself. Thus a celebrated ‘The word mad is therefore a designation used by the man of letters.4 I do not refer to it for the sake of erudition And he added that. Then. in May of 1923 and March of 1924 ist. it isn’t the science of the brain: this is a psychological error Papers on Metapsychology: ‘Every attempt to deduce that has caused much harm for a very long time. he respectively. topique in the French].’ This is perhaps what led Ludwig Binswanger to function of the fingertips than it is a function of a write that Taine’s psychological naturalism had many part of the brain. Bergson letters having difficulty with his ‘I’: Raymond Roussel included.homilies of Paul Royer-Collard to Jean Pierre Flou. or psychological phenomena. they Traumdeutung (1900) Freud introduced the concept of concern the individual taken as a whole. I hope something will come of function of any organ in particular: it is no more the it. in the thought – or the brain – of further to say that it is the streets of Paris themselves physiologists. For. One day all this will be Project for a Scientific Psychology. I only hope that my brain will change.

an author responsible that there is an illusion to be denounced. he or placement in his brain of his sense of ‘locality’ stated: ‘It is wrong to say: I think. are not at all good ways of expressing oneself. calculation. in the chapter entitled ‘Décom- In short. On the basis. Nietzsche wrote: ‘It is a falsification of certain M. he perceives the cogito whose interpretation has divided psychoanalytic within him. a drawing feel. only us’. back in the days before phrenology. IV raphy and philosophy. today’s physiologist – that is to It. It thinks: but that this “it” is ‘faculty which perceives the actions that occur within precisely that famous old “I” is. his biog. This apparently serves to explain why Nietzsche both felt obliged to excuse themselves for Descartes was so well ordered in the administration of having succumbed to the illusion of their thinking I his mind. the I think based on the structure and configuration of the brain was many times over refused or refuted in favour harbour. I think. Spurzheim seemed to Nietzsche expressed this same idea on many occa- be justified in stating that Descartes was not as great sions. which ‘eventuality’ is present. after the phrenologist. ’ And in Beyond Good and existence. etc. Since the cogito. by who are attracted to it for other reasons. extension. Because Descartes now is the brain in ‘Wo Es war soll Ich werden. Rimbaud and tone. in which Rimbaud portrays himself as a seer. But who without relying on arguments drawn from neurophysi. wrote: ‘The expressions. Ulm a question: how can an I think come to this It or Id and Amsterdam. So to sum up: a century after Gall and Spurzheim it it is this brain that contains the faculty to perceive had become possible to pursue the work of psychology the actions that occur within him or it [lui]. but must briefly return again to phrenology. contains pages of commentary about berg’s phrase in his memoirs from 1889. and quite independently of one another. One ought to say: I is further meant to explain why he led a nomadic am thought [on me pense]. However. One of the many works that sought to popularize say “it is thinking” just as we say “it is raining”. to put it mildly. not philosophically in the ‘brain–thought’ problem. to understand better what is at stake central ambiguity. can be appropriated for my own purposes. for having remarked that the cogito the facts to say: the subject “I” [moi] is the condition is a simple effect of ‘eventuality’. he moves around like a nomad And the last word of this historical overview remains all the way from Poitou to Sweden. quoting Lichten- Docteur Gall. a list can be found in Bernard Pautrat’s book a thinker as generally believed. or what now is this ‘him’ [lui]? This brings us to the ology. configuration. shape within us [es denkt in uns]. from the outset. an intrinsic ambiguity. a judgement takes ties’: individuality. that is to say. lies in a brain that must indeed What is called thinking? Even though this question be acknowledged as his brain. position du cogito’. Because Descartes is a brain in which schools. also and above all at the beginning of On Geometry from 1637: ‘I shall call unity … I shall not hesitate to III introduce these terms …. David also praises an expert phrenologist. of an image of Descartes’s skull. in its wake he becomes incontestable the fact of the illusion becomes. where he preceded today’s hippies. eventuality. Des. language. The more certain the conviction cartes was considered a thinker.’5 and promote phrenology. One should rather say: it thinks in me [es denkt in mir]. Georg Lichtenberg stated: ‘we should form. the more for his philosophical system. ‘reflective intellectual faculties’.’? Explanations of intellectual functions and their effects Throughout the nineteenth century. The weight of arguments Descartes’s head ‘all the perceptive intellectual facul.’ A little before this. The phrenologist. instead. [Ça] indicated and described. weight. colouring. Imbert. and the the bearer of a brain that thinks under the name of more pressing the duty to account for it. Versions du soleil. The presence 1871. to a brain? then. and how it was that he came to apply algebra [leur moi pensant]. via Paris. of the of the predicate “think”. ‘locality’ is present. based on a portrait by Franz Hals. locality. Who or what is it that says I. Über allege- a portrait of Descartes taken from Johann Kasper meine Denkfehler. was not a result of the an assumption’ (§17). a disciple of Spurzheim. in 1886. I Lavater’s (1778) Physiognomic Fragments. time. since has Heideggerian echoes in fashionable philosophical 10 . then. the expert in phrenology concludes that all of Descartes. Alexandre David’s Le Petit The neurologist Sigmund Exner. does not depend on our will. order.’ This phrase of Freud’s. we only at the beginning of The Discourse on Method. locates in various places on it feels in me [es fühlt in mir]. René Descartes. Descartes’s brain. In his Philosophische ambiguity glaring because they presented it in a crude Bermerkungen. of a ‘thinking’ [penser] that proceeded without any Attempts to popularize such explanations made this responsible personal subject. In the famous letter to Izambard of to geometry and mathematics to optics. a Evil.

David Hubel. though one might deem that Pascal clearly accept that the brain is part of an organism. But if it isn’t possible to conceive by reflecting on its own specific nature’. in trying to push back these boundaries are also we can speak of the computer as a brain or the brain more cautious about the possibility of overcoming 11 . as to the animals. they exceed thinking. But it isn’t of a machine that is motivated by the project to build only journalists who say such things. duced by people.e. etymologically from reor. calculation. improperly enlarged this concept to include all sorts that is to say. dualist) argument according to which from asking. incidentally. of physiologists. who can forbid the philosopher spiritualist’ (i. neyed metaphor of the brain–computer is justified in so and then knowledge [connaissance] is further refined far as what is meant by thinking involves logical opera. reasoning. But it does nothing that would material memory’ (p. i. issue on the brain. of desiring effects without precedent in its experience. different questions the cerebral computer is incapable of comprehending than those posed by physiologists? This by no means itself. François Dagognet can write: ‘The real breakthrough mine the various kinds of thinker one is prepared to is that man has managed to externalize the cerebral admit. Such motiva. who. that the human amounts to contesting the physiologist’s knowledge on brain (1012 neurons. according to Jean Nageotte’s definition. The now hack.7 who recently published a special consciously motivated will to construct. the brain doesn’t operate according correction of physiologists’ knowledge are the concern to a linear sequential programme. the property of being the organ in which the approaches. 1014 synapses. Better. but we do not yet know exactly how this occurs. If the arithmetical machine property that physiologists ascribe to the brain. that is the effect of a brain’s calculations to which it itself is. He writes: ‘This tronics. transmission and switching of signals. angle. dismisses the ‘materialo- origin of the computer. In the same journal. extended by that other paradoxical poeple like Pascal himself. to mimic properties of the brain already identi. Depending on our preference. As if an action that turns back on itself could be taken ration of responses. The definition one gives of thinking will deter. apropos of the brain. The physiologist is master in his own Francis Crick also shows how the analogy between house. one hundred its own terms. enable us to attribute will to it. and the recording of operations. 8) and conversely that ‘The brain itself … duces effects which approach nearer to thought than all emerges as redefined as a result of being relayed by the actions of animals. as if it was a matter of tions. on the basis of this model. as transcendent in relation to a direct action. In his book Mémoire pour l’avenir. elabo. whose effects retical strategy that is typical of contemporary science: are even closer to thought than were those of Pascal’s a model is constructed on the basis of observation and machine. thinks’ (p. if there is no computer at the absolute renowned neurophysiologist. Reason. we that it is part of a mechanism ‘whose construction is must admit that there is at least one animal capable part of its functioning’. The progress and the future.circles. ‘very direct’ experience we have of it. Pascal argued.e. considered as regards the mechanisms artificially pro- namely man as the inventor of machines – that is. experiments undertaken in a certain domain of reality. The author of the Pensées and inventor of the processes thanks to which he calculates. derives reality itself. a a machine. could never be attained by any of our life’ has discovered ‘its marvellous properties mechanical device. ratio. of behaviour guided by the needs of living beings. conscious perception in a way that sheds light on the enabled by the development of twentieth-century elec. we must at least admit that the stubborn representation of its functioning would be included determination to construct fifty variations of a machine in the functioning itself? The editors of the journal before hitting on its definitive version is proof of a Pour la science. that physiologists have not yet managed to describe The computer emerged as a by-product of an attempt. 199).’6 Here we encounter a specific case of a general theo- We are not far here from the computer.. Is this paradoxical property. even in exercise of this knowledge depends. Hubel accepts. The description of this functional nature of the schema However there are some physiologists who do not in the current language of computing does not fun. The structure of and relations between thousand billion) is different to the computer. blur the boundaries and limits of their science and damentally change it. speaks and ‘thinking reed’ wrote: ‘The arithmetical machine pro. But the philosopher’s indiscretion knows no brain and computer is misleading. As for the Let’s consider the following question: physiologists will of animals. I shall look at it from its banal and trivial as a computer. maintain that this ‘great computer tion.’ reception. phenomenon is strongly suspected of being a feedback fied by nineteenth-century neuro­physiology: stimulus effect. to calculate. whose the brain’s neurons are the condition upon which the components may never attain such a number. Besides. He notes with regret bounds.

risk of being mistaken. today. if we cannot arrive at an understanding of means of automating the regulation of social relations. ‘artificial brain’ or step. since the question is foreign to of data according to the rules set by a programme? its domain of validity – that is. wrote: ‘In this task.10 Just as Torres y Quevedo’s The Chess Player a science of the brain. processing of data according to a given set of instruc- Professor Michel Jouvet. to formal arithme. without the its own secrets? Even with the help of a computer. and the invention of a theorem from the Nouvel Observateur 8 whether he thought a quite another. is still a computer inside of ourselves? A model of scientific irreplaceable and will remain so for a long time’.’ And a mathematician. A computer is capable of calculating the chemical formula for ‘the consciousness of conscious. Invention cannot system cannot comprehend another unless it is more proceed without the consciousness of a logical void. ‘conscious machine’. getting on a bus: ‘the instant I put my foot on the scious brain’. were later cleverly reworked as advertising Thom. first coined by scientists on the basis of a ‘mad research [les recherches insensées] can lead to legitimate recourse to heuristic models or sophisticated unforeseen discoveries. formalizing the unformalizable. it isn’t capable ness’ might one day be discovered. Valéry wrote that metaphors. after Mind or Brain with Machine. then. There is a long list of publications in as described by Henri Poincaré in his Science and the Anglo-American domain with titles that combine Method.9 And what place is there for such an ‘on’ in a cerebral No doubt we should ask whether. we might well ask. How. who don’t feel obliged to think of transformations that had enabled him to define these their minds in terms of computer contacts. ers. the biomathematician the anonymity of the machine. trajectory of a rocket in outer space. its clever you like a home computer? Why not. remarked: ‘One of formulating the law of gravitation. terms? The answer no doubt lies in the fact that these In his study Au sujet d’Eurêka. ing models capable of approximating chance and of nology. to upset normal tic. of inappropriate expressions such as ‘con. if our brains are themselves computers? Would the human brain with its old biological past. As for more general. But public at large have in the electronic machinery of we cannot imagine it discovering Fuchsian functions human thought. he took machinery that has been assembled to connect pieces too many liberties. even one enhanced through includes a gramophone that can say ‘check!’. noted in a recent work. its subtle aesthetic sensibility. When Newton was asked how I am not very sure that we will be able to translate he found what he was looking for. After several periods of fruitless work. in a sudden flash. the calculation or explanation that confuse logic and feeling [le ressenti]. the idea came to me…’ Will there ever be logical ‘artificial intelligence’. since we all have approximations. can imagine a machine that cries out ‘eureka’ upon It’s difficult not to be astonished by the very wide.11 research was thereby converted into a machine of ideological propaganda with a twofold purpose: to V anticipate or disarm all opposition to the invasion of a However. There is no functions and those of non-Euclidian geometry. in doing so. Pierre Nelson concludes with reflections about ‘the But regardless of whether we are talking about unsatisfying objectivity’ characteristic of types of analogical or logical machines. that is to say flash came to him one day in Coutances as he was the abuse. so we recourse to the computer. who explored the difficulties of construct- clichés during the industrial phase of computer tech. when asked by a journalist tions is one thing. he is alleged to have all the processes of consciousness in neurobiological responded: ‘By thinking on it continually. having discovered the solution to a problem for which spread interest that not only scientists but also the the data and constraints were given in advance. complex. To invent is to create information. several times abandoning the problem and taking it interest discussion. Logic… So will our brain be able to decipher without being drawn to a new possibility.’ What sense terms. Nevertheless we ought to credit these biologists habits of thinking and the established state of knowl- for their reluctance to deduce consciousness from edge.’ But is the question really one of logic? François are we to give to this ‘on’? What is this situation of Jacob once invoked Gödel’s theorem in order to back thinking in which one aims at what one does not see? up an answer similar to that given by Michel Jouvet. automatons to which ideas might suddenly come in are we to explain these conjunctions of incompatible this way? I will respond by connecting two quotations. René simulators. there are no self-respecting that there was a relation of identity between the spiritualists. Bernard d’Espagnat has up again. how the brain is capable of invention by comparing it 12 . How could we have anything against comput. In the prologue to his work Logique des and to conceal the presence of decision-makers behind neurones et du système nerveux.these limits. This need to draw attention to the growing use. Poincaré understood. as M.

they succeed only in reduplicating could also be applied to their causes. Such it in chemical terms? Since the use of certain so. projects believe they can solve. Pascal has in mind the memory cases in point are Parkinson’s disease. we will discover no longer there to sustain them they will eventually invention-enhancing substances as well. on the and an ability to adapt to circumstances and to learn. (l‑dopa). some researchers have begun to hope pro-solution [pro-solution] (or pro-conception) pill. the administrator. espionage. time is drawing near when. that the brain secretes Anti-psychiatry’s current hostility to psycho­ thought as the liver does bile. So I shall deliberately refrain here from treating experienced anything like them before – no mention a question that in all logic should lead us to consider is made. pharmacology. it seems we are not yet in a posi- inhibit a certain amount of physical and moral pain. with an artificial memory that of anaesthetics for surgery. if not A Computer’s Self-Critique. Two (§371). But there is a big difference between dealing of a bookshop a book entitled A Computer’s Auto­ with a temporary breakdown. a drug relieve. which can of the calculator. and despite neuropeptides – encephalins and endorphins – that is. or a problem of counter. The memory of time lost and time regained. the be counteracted by the action of the drug levodopa strategist. Discoveries of effects of certain chemical mediators. following the example set Proust wrote ‘that when the desire of a living body is by memory-enhancing substances. There is talk perish’? for instance of developing a drug capable of arousing A proper examination of the subject deserves more a feeling of déjà vu. 13 . the researcher. despite the existence of and welcome of excitations at the level of synapses. biography. to put it more simply. have given us the power to neuroendocrinology. tion to announce. cific molecules involved in modifying the trans­mission Consequently. the particular problem of the solution improvements in the treatment of certain nervous and to problems in general via the invention of a sort of mental disorders. and. to use an expression of François Dagognet. exempt from memory disturbances. Given the spectacular results of some of their work. but also the memory that says ‘When I was young…’. or. which can be eased if not It is the memory we believe we can imitate. so as to help people solve prob. replace with the automatic whose discovery might be deemed as important as was processing of banks of data. than one conference paper and more than one confer- lems that appear difficult only because they haven’t ence. the perspectives opened up by certain discoveries in of endogenous substances. cured by the administering of chlorpromazine. of the particular problems to be the likelihood that some day we will see in the window solved. and ‘when I was small I hugged my book’ means of chemically affecting neuromediators. It’s hard VI not to indulge in irony about the lengths to which the What now are we to call thinking in cases where what popularizers seem prepared to go. But. at the level of cerebral called psychotropic substances has brought about real microstructures. however. and a mathematical problem such as the general proof of Fermat’s famous theorem. which are readily attributed a sense of appropriateness ent. stems in part from an unjust indiffer. as they try to put their ideas into practice. for that and above all to enhance brain performance. problems ‘memory is necessary for all the operations of reason’ that it’s perfectly reasonable to treat or attenuate by (§369). without a fulcrum. This is memory as archive and inventory. that power which he says no machine can call the conception pill – would itself be considerably simulate? Pascal’s insistence may appear clumsy to facilitated by the prior invention of the thing it is all those who might readily object by evoking today’s designed to produce? In other words.to an electronic machine. I shall recall two more of his Pensées: ence to problems of metabolic disturbance. its systematic denunciation of ‘chemical I have not forgotten that Pascal did not forget straightjackets’. and schizophrenia. the tortoises and electronic animals of Grey that aim to develop a chemical aid to invention [un Walter or Albert Ducrocq – so many machines to soutien à l’heuristique] would themselves be depend. in using a lever increasing interest in cerebral chemistry and the spe. at the limit. that this power to affect the symptoms of a disorder In fact. In the first case. about memory. for those authors of an article in Newsweek12 claim that the memories of which. like Cabanis. research projects robots. perhaps we might explain prior achievement of the very project in question. it would have been surprising if psychopharma­cologists what kind of future does this ‘memory for the future’ had not sought to extend the power of chemistry open up for memory? What future is opened up for not only to try to overcome brain defects. Whence the the problem. however. in the final lines of his book. And how can we not is at issue is that power of a living being that Pascal see that the invention of this drug – what we might calls ‘will’. multiply.

all sider Skinnerian conditioning to be the reflection reference to thought and consciousness was forbidden. Henri Piéron is non-reductionist in so far as it expressly recognizes would borrow the word comportement from him to that the human cultural environment is a historical translate the English word behaviour. via the open or disguised distribution of de l’apprentissage (Seuil. do we not thereby rely on such conclusions come close to identifying resuscitate empiricism. which as we know emerged learning with training [dressage]. organized at Royaumont and recently the techniques that orient and guide individuals in the published under the title Théories du langage. response relation onto an innate reflex relation. must we then identify innateness with they slide more and more away from the concept of genetic cerebral programming? This was the question education towards the concept of manipulation. de-conditioning. Even though – thanks in short to a = brain serves as a justification for techniques of strange process of exclusion and retention – ‘psychol. The thought–language of Skinner’s boxes. some of which were still considered as But what is essential about the human social environ­ intelligent. a word adopted effect and not a natural given. things and acts in a cultural environment raise no other through repeated positive reinforcement. we should note that the theory property of that language but a property of the human of conditioning based on Pavlov’s work has. A house is capacity of judgement. its hardness is not merely a given of sensibility. though without reference to any reflective ment is that it is a system of significations. are that are not always sufficiently differentiated: Pavlovian at the root of what human beings understand as the conditioning. in the USA in the early years of the twentieth century thought is not a purely cerebral function. an effect relative to the guided forms of animal conduct [conduites animales type of society in which it intervenes. Ultimately. In a con- polarisées] as biological phenomena of adaptation to servative or repressive society. however. 1979). been incorporated into a philosophy that adult interlocutors could just as easily have acquired 14 . of American society and the means of conserving and the brain was treated merely as a black box whose it. which works. sharpened flint is not simply stone: satisfy a given need. as Skinner would involved in the calculation of pros and cons. a track. Chomsky believes he can account for why it is an anthropology that claims to subscribe to dialectical that a child who learns to speak the language of his materialism. To which American radicals respond by saying only features worthy of analysis were the inputs that that conditioning. by dint of repeated experiences of relation refers to the brain–thought question via the error-punishment or of correctness-reward. But there are two sorts of conditioning gesture whose primordial effects.13 rewards? By arguing that a language’s grammar is not a To be fair. normalizing conduct. Progressive neurologists con- ogy’ remained the name for this study of behaviour. that learning and mastering the meaning of Skinnerian or instrumental conditioning. Intelligence in this objective not perceived as stone or wood but as shelter. distinc. Even for in the face of obstacles encountered in the search to Neanderthal man. Is language ‘learned’ in the pigeon acquires the apparently intelligent behaviour same way as every other behaviour. chemical straightjacketing are not the privilege of any tions were still made between various forms of living particular country. meaning [sens] of their existence. behaviour. which works by grafting a stimulus. Inside one culminate in that of language. Ham- uses techniques of conditioning by means of learning mering or percussion is not merely a movement but a apparatuses. To at stake in a debate between Noam Chomsky and which of these two enterprises should we associate Jean Piaget. a pathway sense consisted merely in the correction of behaviour is not levelled earth. From this perspective. Can it be argued. it is It is well known that the objective study of behaviour above all caught up in a project to make tools. Of course. into account. a biological by Thorndike. thanks to brain. and to understanding during an epoch that knew nothing of brain functions? every environment as a milieu (including the social and If it is necessary to take innate linguistic capacities cultural environment in the case of people). the equation thought the environment.Pascal could not foresee that in 1908. Jennings and Watson to designate product. theories social milieu. it is a passage. it is a social effect. a rat or language–brain relation. tools and fire. It would be hard to deny that those who identify learning and conditioning. Both have it? Is language teaching analogous to a type of these theories of conditioning think it legitimate to conditioning whose aim is to form a stable relationship apply conclusions obtained from the study of animals between a signifier. and then. to consolidate problems of method than those involved in the train- forms of behaviour that achieve satisfactory solutions ing of animals through conditioning? These problems but that were initially discovered by chance. brainwashing and entered it and the outputs that left it. a signified and a referent? If we to humans.

Conversely. intends to do on the basis of the relationships that the phies that defend the innateness of rational principles. No more than in the nineteenth century. could be taken as the indication of an activity that The day was dying. enfant qui rêve. so there is in the folds example. I stood by the sea on the serves to maintain the hereditary programme. When people object that what Chomsky In short. One is tempted to evoke Rousseau’s oppo. Chomsky argues [sens].a different language by communicating with different VII interlocutors. an infringement or stretching What is certain is that his opposition to Skinner and [entorse] of meaning. He puts forward the idea perceive what we have been obliged to think since that dreams. to lecture merits our attention. the meaning of uttered speech in the relation to… is not The belief that the human mind is empty provides the production of a physical configuration in the brain a justification for all sorts of authoritarian systems. j’étais près des mers. Victor Hugo this indicates that justifications for political positions can later claim to perceive the opposite of what he must be sought elsewhere than in the brain. as a strand. human language is essentially a semantic assumes to be inscribed in the fixed core of language function that physicalist kinds of analysis have never is something that could be attained through general managed to explain. feign it. the expression of a cerebral activity closed Copernicus and Galileo: to external afferences. Because meaning is a relation to. La terre. Meaning or sense is not a relation between…. as in Skinner. philoso. The relationship of meaning in to the theory he presents in Verbal Behavior parallels language is not that of an immaterial replica [réplique] his political opposition to Skinner’s theses in Beyond of physical relations between elements or systems of Freedom and Dignity (1971): elements in the brain of the speaker. and does not strictly speaking see the objects that our eyes this can be taken to extremes. for the moment. in today’s But Chomsky’s opponents claim that arguments for electronic age we cannot explain scientific cognition the innateness of intellectual capacity can also be used and poetic experience by means of a cerebral replica in favour of elitism. we have to take into account a with the genetic determination of cerebral capacities. cut off from the environment. in order to help justify inegalitar. When ian social relations.16 sity of universal constraints of linguistic competence In all these instances. On this sees at sunset. sur la grève. To speak is to signify. 15 . Copernicus and that in its current biological version the debate between Galileo can say that the sun rises. gap in the relation to. pedagogy and politics. The young soul was still and silent! guardian of natural freedom in reaction to cultural Rolling like a sinking ship caught up in a swell. but it is harder to see how he can identify the neces. If the human mind is empty then any method for of the interlocutor. machine produces. and the fell. people can play with it. tion. axiom according to which man is born free but is And the pale night began its ascent. I had by the hand. Dreams would then be the My daughter. s’inclinant comme un vaisseau qui sombre. because to think is to live within meaning learn requires an initial disposition. set traps. by the way. constraints. since like them empiricism and innateism supplies arguments to both they saw the sun’s globe rising above the horizon sides of the political spectrum. where everything ends up in a sort of of the cortex no thought that contemplates ghosts of fascist schema. for are supposed to give us to see. Savoyard Priest prevents us from including him among Je tenais par la main ma fille. dreamy child. The earth pitched on through space as the darkness sition between savage and civilized man. twist it.17 everywhere in chains. to give to intelligence. speaking with their gardener or valet. rupture in social relations. he responds by saying that learning to understand. it that the need to have recourse to a generative capacity is a relation to… That is why it escapes every attempt in order to explain language learning simply confirms to reduce it to an organic or mechanical configura- what Wilhelm von Humboldt recognized about creativ. indifferently. but they are not in relation to what the user claims an allegiance to Descartes and Leibniz. Suffice it to say. that is. Just as our visual cerebral sphere fashioning minds to one’s liking is legitimate. of the relation between organism and milieu.14 the objects or situations that our words have in mind. No doubt – but they do not think the sun rises. the conclusion of Jouvet’s15 of the apparent movement of the stars. So-called intelligent machines are machines that ity when he said: ‘A language can make infinite use produce relations between sets of data that we provide of finite means. to perceive in some sense the truth latter point.’ It’s easy to understand why Chomsky to them. lie. But Rousseau’s own Creed of a [Le jour mourait. those who look to physiology for the foundations of Jeune esprit qui se tait.

that is. between 1945 and 1948): ‘Philosophers who believe not as I would see the wall surrounding a painting that that one can. what he found invit. acknowledgement section of Maurice Merleau-Ponty’s posthumous work. on the illusion of psychic interiority. represented things about which one can speak.’ Certainly. not the human body or the human zens. but it is tice of phone tapping. I am the totality of my vision. that our things and people is as much the I of Spinoza as the field of vision is not itself seen by a sort of mental I of Descartes. the limit – not a part of the world. colour is not agreeable to everyone. but not abolished. The I is not with the world in a relation individuals for contagious thought disorders – evictions of overview [survol]. confronted by [moi]. Interiority is exteriority ence to Wittgenstein. The vision of this treatise …. by the introduction of the (external) world into it via and who says in a speech balloon: ‘I don’t see anything sensory pathways. represents a landscape around which someone who ought to know that one can transmit speech via the says I sees nothing. are among the marks of thought. I but as its claim or demand [revendication]. and should not arouse suspicions of solipsistic accept all the theses of existentialism. the concept of interior- prefer. Wittgenstein provided an incisive surrounding [autour du] the landscape.] be argued that. we have Denis has said that Cézanne used the term motif to argued. the painter’s vision (Les Contemplations: Magnitudo Parvi) as act of presence to the world is more instructive than The relationship between brain. Whence the practice of evicting also mobile. and as a man the painter is also a signifying relation to. ‘that all be granted the right to be able to think soul of which psychology treats. Le paysage isolé. Spinoza asserts the of perception: impersonal axiom Homo cogitat. extend experience in thought. It might La pâle nuit montait. Although (5. Properly understood. despite the geometrically demonstrated Ethics. but one can This is proof that I do not coincide with that of which transmit over the telephone discourses whose symbolic I constitute the limit. as quoted above. what they want and to say what they think’. the perceptual field is an absolute surface. the refer- ity conveys a spatial image. for this One can.’ Intentions. Thinking is a human human speech refers to thought which itself refers practice that requires self-consciousness in presence to a subject that is not a part of the world but. The author of turned inside out [renversée]. The I occurs in philosophy through the fact the Sovereign’s acknowledged right to govern over all that the ‘world is my world’. transmit the measles via the telephone. 16 . but in a relation of surveillance that generally last longer than the eighteen days during [surveillance]. I is not. I know that I am a man. but not the measles. one cannot I can always change the whole of my vision by moving. but the meta- physical subject.’ It is very true word on this point in his Zettel (fragments written that I do not see anything surrounding the landscape. As Raymond Ruyer would say. the surveillant [surveillant] I of the world of from which he draws a general consequence. for the philosopher. respect. the l’ombre. Or one might idealism. thought and world a psychophysiological theory of vision. not as the representation of the subject Wittgenstein says. The Spinozist name what he wished to represent. as in the opening From a philosophical point of view. A painting by thus cannot be conceived as the mental (or internal) René Magritte. rather than the subject. While Descartes inwardly considers eye. The philosophical I things in the state concerning the actions of its citi- is not the man. so to speak. In this the Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus insists on the fact. subscribe to critical reflection presence is vigilance and more exactly sur-veillance. Spinoza is philosophy we can talk of a non-psychological I that I who in the last chapter demands. an eye that might be localizable within the world the self-evidence of his cogito. on grounds of axiological neutrality. Maurice liable to error. En tournant dans l’espace allait plongeant dans ing him to paint. of a subjectivity without interiority involves no contra- The Visible and the Invisible – without needing to diction. as to the world. mistakes – these. for example. but telephone. at the end of this work he could not restrain himself from Perhaps the best commentary on this text is not to writing: ‘I have thus fulfilled the task I set myself in be found in philosophy but in painting.641)18 Spinoza generally used the modest pronoun ‘we’. This brings us back to the point on which we ended There are several ways to account for the fact that our initial historical outline. ‘a pre-supposition of its existence’. But when he comes There is therefore really a sense in which in to compose Theologico-Political Treatise. Whence the prac. is the image of a reproduction of physical effects produced in the brain landscape contemplated by a man seen from behind. which you must stay home from school if you come VIII down with the measles.

This is why we he shared. and of things. who charges of having engaged in political critique. its specific task is not to increase Cartesian and Spinozist conceptions of the relation thinking’s output or yield [rendement]. No doubt we Husserl put it. however. interventions that tend to deprive thought of its power osophy. Friend of Johan de Witt. in politics. A suspension of acquiescence. Spinoza was witness to the latter’s assas. it is the guardian of spirit contrast. whose republican convictions neither withdrawal nor abstention. This task of negation is by no means negative. nonetheless Spinoza says I it of the meaning of its power. Coming out of one’s reserve means setting in God and people – this philosophy without subject.any less I than is the I of Descartes’s On Geometry. frequently reduced to a materialist system. Of such conduct as an example. Regardless of the opposition between the As for philosophy. Spinoza. psychology to continue to make suggestions as to by a certain eternal necessity’. its author the strength of mind or spirit [ressort] I think you will grant me that in taking Spinoza’s required to rebel against le fait accompli. Of course. Philosophy must therefore leave it to ‘consciousness of oneself. how its theoretical advances might be exploited in on account of the fourth section of the Discourse that pedagogy. as it says in the for philosophical minds ever since. took a public stand in favour of the right to [garde du ressort]. But his last word is that ‘all things excellent are resist this pretension of a part to want to account as difficult as they are rare’. as rum.19 In short. on the Descartes is very careful to defend himself against one hand among psychoanalyzing psychoanalysts. with the living that refutes and rejects the foundations of Cartesian regulator of active interventions in the world and philosophy – the cogito. oneself against all foreign interventions into the brain. this philosophy is something we do with our brain. He has kept his distance from people izing physicalists. precedes it. the wise man may 17 . in the economy. must take care not to appear to internalize the I. the affirmation of freedom society. as so happens that Spinoza actually did both. philosophy must provide an account. emerged back in the days of Aristotle should not attribute to Spinoza a philosophy other than in a manner that has remained a ‘permanent disaster’ his own. freedom of thought. ultimately. sense to that little word I. Spinoza’s philosophy. His conduct is the proof that. To come out of one’s house In pursuit of this end. who will denounce the ridiculous whose ‘muddled and worried temperaments’ led them preservation of something inherited from a defunct towards opposition. the very moment when we might be tempted to merge as the armies of Louis XIV were invading Holland. whom he critique. So. just as Descartes ing the I as a non-transferable claim or demand of in his Replies to the Fifth Set of Objections says I presence-surveillance is to see its sole role as that of when defending himself against Gassendi. and on the other hand among physical- own thought. philosophy can expect nothing is the symbolic image of coming out of one’s reserve. this phil. To defend one’s walls of the city on which he wrote: Ultimi barbaro. In the second part of the Discourse. Grand of support [adhésion]. reserve obliges one to come out of it occasionally. of the conditions of possibility under which one might Descartes and Spinoza. since to defend a reserve is also to preserve For my part. at sination in 1672 by an Orangeist mob in The Hague. lived by the philosopher who thought it. He will take it as a symptom of misrecognition of the states that all he wanted to do was to reform his unconscious. I have no qualms in saying. I have neither promoted confu- spirit [ressort]. But philosophical reserve is neither began with a philosophy of prudence. as if he were the solitary and outcast representative To assign philosophy the specific task of defend- who acts in defence of his system. Philosophy can only ence. to situate body’s affections arrange themselves in keeping with itself among the other objective sciences and to teach the order and sequence of thoughts in the mind. It is said his landlord had to use force to restrain did Spinoza. is Pensionary of Holland. It from the services of psychology. To leave or come out of one’s reserve him. I can easily imagine subjective function of presence–surveillance is the the sort of sarcasm the word reserve. by hiding place nor sanctuary.20 By ‘psychology’ I last part of the Ethics. and of God. true them about the intellectual functions that allow them freedom would be the perfection of this correspond- to be the sciences that they are. The philosopher of générosité spiritualism. subjectivity and interiority – in reaction against the Spinoza’s indignation and sorrow determined him to current assimilation of thought to what René Thom has leave his lodging in order to put up a poster on the called ‘the electronic hardware shop’. that it is the latter whose leave or come out of it. while waiting to attain for the whole. and. designates as ‘Flesh’. of adherence [adhérence]. a discipline that. employed to give most manifest. sion nor played on words. but to remind between soul and body. cannot fail to elicit. gave of reserve in the last resort [en dernier ressort]. the order and connection of the mean a science that pretends to be objective.

metaphysical subject. Seuil. located the is incapable of machination. A machine cannot play tricks on you. Language commitment monitored by their brain – to write on the and Learning: The Debate between Jean Piaget and walls. ‘Études de psychologie linguis. and Georges 5. ‘The Mechanical Concept of Mind’. als Bei. he came out of it through an imperceptible Cartesian 11. Seuil. René Thom further stresses the adventurous character of theoretical invention when At first glance. Leibniz et Spinoza. and even though he knew that the Paris. Paris. Harvard Classics. Jean Piaget et al. Wittgen­stein does not mean ontological subject – and 3. Pierre Janet. He was the grandson of the illustrious scious robot. believing that the barbarians he publicly denounced rational. But he understood Latin mont: Théories du langage. the latest 12. today’s philosophers. is a sort of objective measure of wrote that we do not know all the capacities of the the originality of that invention. man sagen sowie man sagt es blitzt (literally: ‘there is p. 1970. Michael Schriven makes mathematics bump above the left eye-socket. a decision. Prentice Hall. in the terms of physics and and resource of strength of mind we can avoid and chemistry – that is another matter.) 14. Not only as a result of complexity. of psychosurgery. vol. théories de Translated by Steven Corcoran l’apprentissage.html. a memory. §340. I should add that. decision about what conduct to take regarding ‘the 8. Théories du langage. Pascal. Œuvres. Paris. The man who 10. Cambridge. 2. To put it differently. Pour la Science. Paris. 393.’ Colloque de Royau- would be the last of their kind. a thesis by Claude Prévost. Consequently. See his Über die Anlage zur Mathematik. 21. Cf. Chomsky. 1891. Gottlieb Burckhardt. even at the time of Tractatus Logico- ‘L’excision de la pierre de folie’. He might have made the mistake of the desire to carry out forbidden operations (negative. Théories du langage. Paris. 19. 18 . lightning’). ‘Über Rindenexcisionen. 110. Paris. 20. guish between consciousness and an apparently con- Leipzig.com/hugoinfo/2003_03_ Zeitschrift für Psychiatrie 47. 229. 1979. La Logique du vivant. Allgemeine Geoffrey Barto. This is what led Max human body and that we sometimes wrongly attribute Planck to say in his Autobiography that for a discovery them to the soul – this man came out of his home along to gain general recognition it is not enough to accumu- with his brain. that a logical system cannot suffice to describe he had said that indignation is necessarily bad (since itself. 218 n1. Pierre Janet. Husserl. a German neuro­ can play tricks on itself. Charles Appuhn Garnier. Notes 16. 508.. in Autrement: Guérir Philosophicus. 29 October 1979. 1907. ‘But to describe a movement of consciousness. 1979. (Translators’ note  The English version was published as Jean Piaget. An interesting study on Pierre Janet is to be found in is reported by Jakob Freudenthal. 9. a feel- ordinary dangers of life… [which] through readiness ing. Cited in Henri Atlan. tique’. Payot. 4. any more than it 1.on occasion find himself obliged to make an instant 7. Noam Chomsky. 1904. fences or ramparts: Ultimi barbarorum. we might think that Spinoza had he says: ‘Almost all progress in algebra stems from made a mistake. and Peter Hallward 15. vol. Baruch Spinoza. 337. 1980. p. http://gbarto. Spinoza. 1975–76. inventor of the Möbius strip. Cours du Collège de France 1923–1924. Harvard University Press. Gallimard.’ François Jacob. but also because we know. Seuil. 73–80. 12 November 1979. 1964. and Massimo Piattelli-Palmarini. Pensées. théories de whatever their line of research. 1909. p. imaginary numbers. are guaranteed not to lack occasions or Chomsky. Translators’ note  Translation of Magnitudo Parvi by trag zur operativen Therapie der Psychosen’. There is nothing to overcome’. in Prospective et Santé 14. crack in its philosophical construction. to come along. théories de l’apprentissage. and he did so in a manner that was late theoretical proofs: it often has to wait for its adver- saries to disappear and for a new scientific generation certainly in keeping with his philosophy. 1973. Entre le crystal et la fumée. 13.21 This is why Spinoza came out in public say that we will ever be able to manage this. after a theoretical invention. it generates hatred). 17. Cambridge MA. p. p. But perhaps to come to power. 1. no. crowd is fearsome when it fears nothing. Translators’ note  The German reads ‘Es denkt sollte Friedmann. Paris. Ethics part 5. Das Leben Spinozas. Nouvel Observateur. 2. Newsweek. ‘Drugs for the mind’. and he meant what he said: the most recent. whether Spinozist or l’apprentissage: Le débat entre Jean Piaget et Noam Cartesian. ed. vol. this account of Spinoza’s conduct 4. La Psychophilosophie de Stuttgart. even though Gödel. p. 1979. 6.). in mathematician and astronomer Auguste Ferdinand Minds and Machines. in Archives de Philosophie. Special Issue. Noam reasons to go out – at their own risk and in an act of Chomsky. Englewood Cliffs Möbius (1790–1868). Philosophie première. The persistence of a stationary state of knowledge. 1923–1924. when he says metaphysical subject pour normaliser 4. proposition 10. p. in his subsequent work he abandons this concept of cited by Marcel Jousse. since to condemn certain men as barbarians. pp. Gallimard ‘Idées’. NJ. Paul-Jules Möbius (1853–1907). 1. Occasionally disputed. on its of the capacity to lie the criterion by which to distin- exterior side. a machine physiologist known as ‘Gall redivivus’. 75. see the article by Alain Jaubert. etc. On the beginnings 01_hugoarchive. See Michel Jouvet’s paper: ‘Les états de vigilance: bilan et perspectives’. November 1979. 18. note. Summer 1980.