consciousness. 8 This part of ethics can be called objective ethics. The rules, in effect, are not the work of each of us; we find them all ready-made for the most part, and what we can add to them in the course of life is infinitely little. Besides, it is not
‘On the General Physics of Law and Morality, 4th Year of the Course, 1st Lecture, December 2, 1899, Course Outline: On Penal Sanctions’
Émile Durkheim, edited and translated by François Pizarro Noël, and Ronjon Paul Datta
W. S .F. Pickering
In Durkheim’s time, Gustave Belot was an active, well-known participant in debates on social issues. Nowadays he is a marginal, largely forgotten figure. This essay aims to provide an introduction to his life and work, in which he was in many ways sympathetic with Durkheim’s project for a social science but was also highly critical of it. The discussion concentrates on Belot’s position on ethics and religion, to bring out where he supported Durkheim and where he attacked him on these two areas of central concern to them both. In particular, it focuses on Durkheim’s critique of Belot’s Etudes de morale positive, then in turn on Belot’s critique of Durkheim’s Formes élémentaires.
This introduces and discusses the background to a virtually unknown text - Durkheim's speech at the funeral of his colleague and friend, Frédéric Rauh (1861-1909). The two men had known one another for some time, and had much in common. But a disagreement had arisen between them, over the individual's role in social life, and came to the fore in their exchange with one another during the debate on Durkheim's 'The Determination of Moral Facts' (1906). This traces the development of Rauh's career and of his views on ethics, outlines the argument of his main book, Moral Experience (1903), and indicates how his work increasingly referred to Durkheim, Lévy-Bruhl and the Année sociologique. But it is above all in an effort to pinpoint what was at stake. For it can seem more of a divergence of perspectives, generating disagreement over the questions it is important to ask, rather than over precisely the same issues.
Introduction, Translation Notes, and Comments
Ronjon Paul Datta and François Pizarro Noël
de sociologie containing lecture notes for ‘Physique des mœurs et du droit’ (1950), published in English as Professional Ethics and Civic Morals ( 1992) . They were discovered at Eveline Halphen's house (Durkheim's granddaughter). The first
The first issue of volume four of Sartre Studies International exemplifies the full range of Sartre’s intellectual output: literary, philosophical and political. Three articles by Colin Davis, Edward Greenwood and Paul Reed are centred on the multiple interactions in Sartre’s work between philosophy and literature. In a penetrating analysis of Sartre’s Le Mur, Colin Davis explores the complex relationship between ethics and fiction, between Moral Law and jouissance. ‘The lie of Sartre’s narrator in “Le Mur”’, contends Davis, ‘represents a way of sharing the pain of his/her powerlessness and mortality’, and is coincidental with ‘an assault through fiction on the reader whose power to judge and comprehend is wrested away’.
The Lenoir-Durkheim Lecture Notes on L'enseignement de la morale
William Watts Miller
These are lectures on morality, attributed to Durkheim by Raymond Lenoir and given to Steven Lukes, who reproduced them in his doctoral thesis on Durkheim. They are published, here, together and in full for the first time. The first group of lectures covers the family, as well as general issues in morality and moral education. The second group of lectures, on civic ethics, covers citizenship, democracy, the state, occupational groups, law, and the idea of la patrie. The lectures conclude with a familiar discussion of discipline, and a more original discussion of duties to oneself. The editorial introduction to the lectures explains the circumstances in which they came to light, and discusses issues of authenticity but also of the general role, in Durkheimian studies, of texts variously attributed to Durkheim or based on notes by his students.
Une sociologie d’État
It is traditional to discuss the relation between Durkheim and Weber as ‘founders of sociology’. At first sight, it might seem odd to couple Durkheim and Hegel. But it can be instructive to compare their approach to issues involving modern individualism, society and the state. In general, they subscribe to a combination of rationalism and developmental ethics, in which the rational is immanent in the real, despite the possibility of ‘contingent’ or ‘pathological’ departures from ‘normality’. More specifically, in the case of the state, they see one of its main historical roles as the emancipation of the individual in a development of the individual personality. At the same time they picture the state as ‘the brain’ of society and insist on its relative autonomy and independence from individuals. Instead, in a critique of direct democracy, they look to a web of intermediate groups and corporations. A basic problematic in their work, and a continuing source of reflection, is how to achieve a balance between individual rights and a necessary authority and legitimacy of public power. In both cases this balance rests, as a matter of principle, on confidence in the skills and civic virtue of political leaders.
As the USA and the UK embark on a foreign adventure held by many to be not only illegal, but also deeply immoral, it is perhaps fit- ting that the current issue of SSI should have a distinctly ethical flavour to it. ‘... will freedom by taking itself for an end escape all situation?’ wondered Sartre at the end of Being and Nothingness, ‘or, on the contrary, will it remain situated? Or will it situate itself so much the more precisely and the more individually as it projects itself further in anguish as a conditioned freedom and accepts more fully its responsibility as an existant by whom the world comes into being?’ The answers to these questions, to be found ‘on the ethical plane’, were famously promised for a ‘future work’. That work never materialised, but the questions remain at the heart of all of Sartre’s ulterior work – whether it be the plays, the existential biographies, the unfinished Notebooks for an Ethics, or the equally unfinished Critique of Dialectical Reason.
John Ireland and Constance Mui
ethics, using the notion of reverent awe as articulated by contemporary philosopher Paul Woodruff. To be sure, admits Arvidson, in Sartre's world, reverent awe as an attitude constitutes yet another manifestation of bad faith consciousness, and he
Edited by Ârash Aminian Tabrizi, Kate Kirkpatrick, and Marieke Mueller
fields within and beyond philosophy and literature. In her contribution, Juliette Simont reads the possibility of a deep Kantian filiation in certain of Sartre’s writings where ethics is concerned. She traces how Sartre initially shares some of Kant