Paul Jackanich | Grove City College (original) (raw)

Uploads

Conference Presentations by Paul Jackanich

In this paper, I show that the Enlightenment can be understood as the attempt to harness the pred... more In this paper, I show that the Enlightenment can be understood as the attempt to harness the predictive power of Newtonian science within the social sphere, and thereby establish a new social science. I then argue that Rousseau criticizes this attempt in his Discours sur les sciences et les arts on two grounds: on the one hand, he holds that the popularization of science, which results in the creation of social science, is fatal to the virtues of a nation; on the other, he maintains that such social science is not science at all, but a vulgarized version of it, what we call scientism. This presentation is composed of three parts. In the first, I explain the philosophical consequences of what Hume calls the Newtonian Revolution. My focus here is to show that Newton’s physics does not refute, for instance, metaphysical or teleological thinking. Rather, Newton simply articulates a method that, on the one hand, can predict the course of nature, and on other hand, neither requires metaphysics nor teleology to achieve this. This is important, for it shows that the Enlightenment that follows is not the consequence of some definitive refutation of, say, first principle philosophy. No, the Enlightenment is mainly inspired by the predictive power of Newtonian physics. Its advocates, notably Voltaire, thus go in search of an epistemology that can be graphed or mapped onto Newton’s physics. In the second part, I explain how this search results in a new, universal conception of man, and a social science that attempts to predict the course of human nature in terms of man’s passions and commerce. Rousseau’s critique, which engages the philosophers of the Enlightenment on precisely these grounds, is then developed in the last part.

Julie : entre l'ordre naturel et l'ordre rationnel -Paul J. Jackanich Résumé : Rousseau publia en... more Julie : entre l'ordre naturel et l'ordre rationnel -Paul J. Jackanich Résumé : Rousseau publia en 1762 deux de ses ouvrages les plus fameux, Émile ou de l'éducation et Du contrat social. Dans le premier, son personnage le vicaire savoyard reproche aux métaphysiciens d'avoir enraciné la vertu dans la raison et, par conséquent, d'avoir caché sa racine naturelle dans la conscience. Dans le deuxième, il soutient l'idée qu'il faut concevoir un « grand législateur » afin de comprendre comment un peuple, dépourvu de la raison, peut établir les institutions nécessaires pour cultiver cette raison. Le but final du législateur n'est pas de borner la conscience naturelle à la raison, mais plutôt de « dénaturer » le peuple et de remplacer leurs sentiments par la raison. Le vicaire promeut donc l'ordre naturel alors que le législateur promeut l'ordre rationnel. Dans cette présentation je soutiens que le roman de Rousseau Julie ou la nouvelle Héloïse, publié un an avant ces deux ouvrages en 1761, est une dialectique entre ces deux ordres opposants, représentées respectivement par les personnages Saint-Preux, le précepteur et le premier amant de Julie, et Monsieur de Wolmar, le mari de Julie. Le but de la dialectique est de trouver comment l'ordre naturel et égalitaire, auquel Saint-Preux et Julie souscrivent si ardemment, pourrait être réconcilié avec l'ordre rationnel et hiérarchique de M de Wolmar. Bien que Rousseau nous montre les divers moyens de réconcilier ces ordres l'un et l'autre, je soutiens qu'au fond il nie la possibilité d'une réconciliation idéale, c'est-à-dire qu'il rejette la possibilité de l'utopie.

The subject of this paper is Jean-Jacques Rousseau's Rêveries du promeneur solitaire, his final p... more The subject of this paper is Jean-Jacques Rousseau's Rêveries du promeneur solitaire, his final philosophical work. I wish to begin however, with his first major philosophical work, his Discours sur les sciences et les arts, wherein Rousseau once exposed the yoke of opinion that his colleagues, the so-called intellectuals of his day, bore. For I argue that, in Les Rêveries, Rousseau endeavors to apply this critique to himself, something which he had hitherto failed to do. Just as Rousseau's criticisms in the Discours were motivated by Socrates' reflections in the Apology, here too, in Les Rêveries, these reflections play a part. One of Rousseau's goals in Les Rêveries is, I believe, to reconcile himself with humanity for its seemingly universal complicity in his condemnation. By attempting to expose his own opinions, and more fundamentally, the vanity in which they are rooted, Rousseau discovers what is necessary for his reconciliation, or his apology, if you will: an unconditional faith in man's freedom, one which persists despite all vain and conforming opinion, and despite all seaming evil.

Papers by Paul Jackanich

Rousseau’s Discours sur les sciences et les arts predicts the rise of the public intellectual, an... more Rousseau’s Discours sur les sciences et les arts predicts the rise of the public intellectual, and along with him, intellectual trends and scientism. It is therefore a treasure to anyone who has wondered about the cults of “authenticity” and “openness,” or slogans like “believe science.” To be more precise, his goal in the Discours is to expose the philosophes of the Enlightenment as hypocrites who laud the advancement of the sciences only to “distinguish” themselves and win power. In this way, the Discours parallels the City of God, where St. Augustine argues that self-love [amor sui] leads to the will to power [libido dominandi]. Rousseau’s Discours is unique however, since he considers the philosophes to be unconscious hypocrites. That is, he does not believe that they treat philosophy and science as “fashions” in order to directly acquire power, but rather because they are over-socialized. In this thesis, I will argue that Rousseau develops a unique method in the Discours for ex...