Advanced Studies in the Philosophy of Social Sciences B [ LFILO2601 ]

Reading knowledge of English sufficient to allow study of contemporary texts in the area of the philosophy of the human and social sciences.

Each year the course will concentrate on a particular theme, and will make sure to present and contrast different philosophical approaches to the theme.
The course will also attempt to combine the study of the selected theme with a reflection on the aims and methods of the philosophy of the human and social sciences.

Upon completion of the course, the student should be able to pursue, in a well-informed and original manner, a question chosen from the area of the philosophy of the human and social sciences.
After completing the course, the student should be able to :
Use research tools appropriate for the philosophy of human sciences ;
Conceptualise the question that has been selected;
Situate the answers to this question within the framework of the history of key concepts in the human and social sciences, and in contemporary philosophical debates between different approaches and theories ;
Include, in the philosophical discussion of the selected question, contributions from other disciplines that bear upon the response to the question ;
Develop arguments regarding the response to the question in an original way.
Submit the method chosen for the study of the selected question to a critical reflection.

The student will be required to present a written work of ten pages taking bearing from the reading of the proposed commentary in the reading file. Having sent this work by mail, the student will in return receive a question on the sent work which he or she has to prepare in readiness for the oral examination.

 Presentation of the question during the oral exam takes the duration of fifteen minutes.

 The written work can be done in French, English, Spanish, or German, in agreement with the Professor.

The course will pursue the objective of introducing the participants to the philosophic stakes of the renewal of collective action theories in the contemporary human sciences (in particular the neo-institutionalism and neo-pragmatism). The organizational structure of the course comprises of four stages, incorporating the contributions of several researchers from the Centre of Philosophy of Law (CPDR)

• Starting from the movement of conventions in economic sciences and passing over to the sociology of the conventions, Alain Loute will question the hermeneutic epistemology mobilized on the background of these models.
• Yasmine Jouhari will continue the course pursuit with Ulrich Beck handling the transition from sociology of risk to the political theory collective action in risk society.
• Laurence Blésin will analyze the consequences of this transition from the point of view of the neo-pragmatic theory of new social movements.
• Marc Maesschalck will continue with the consequences from the point of view of the theory of applied agency in law and in political philosophy.

Compulsory Reading:

One article-chapter for each of the parts and marked by an asterix (*) in the bibliography.

• BECK, U., La Sociétédu risque, Sur la voie d’une autre modernité (trad. L. Bernardi), Paris, Aubier, 2001.
  • BECK, U., « La dynamique politique de la société mondiale du risque », in Conférence Idri et le Medd, décembre 2001.
  • BECK, U., « Subpolitics: Ecology and the Disintegration of Institutional Power», in World Risk Society, USA, Blackwell Publishers Ltd., 1999, pp. 91-108.
  • BOLTANSKI,  L. et CHIAPELLO, E., Le nouvel esprit du capitalisme, Paris, Gallimard, 1999.
• BRATMAN, M. E., Structures of Agency, Oxford University Press, 2006.
  • CEFAI,  D.,Pourquoi se mobilise-t-on ? Les théories de l’action collective, Paris, La découverte/M.A.U.S.S., 2007.
  • DEWEY, J., Le Public et ses problèmes [1927], trad. fr. et introduction par J. Zask, Tours/Pau/Paris, Farrago/Publications de l’Université de Pau/Editions Léo Scheer, 2003.
  • FAVEREAU, O., « L’économie de l’action collective », in F. Chazel (dir.), Action collective et mouvements sociaux, Paris, P.U.F., 1993, pp. 251-256.
  • FAVEREAU, O., « Rationalité », article n° 146, in P. Joffre et Y. Simon (dir.), Encyclopédie de gestion, Paris, Economica, 1997, pp. 2794-2808.
  • LIVET, P. et THEVENOT, L., « Les catégories de l’action collective », in A. Orléan (dir.), Analyse économique des conventions, Paris, P.U.F., 1994, pp. 139-167.
• MAESSCHALCK, M., Transformation de l’éthique, De la phénoménologie radicale au pragmatisme social, PIE Peter Lang, Bruxelles, 2010, à paraitre.
• MAESSCHALCK, M.et LOUTE, A., « Points forts et points faibles des nouvelles pratiques de réforme des Etats sociaux », in Sozialalmanach 2007, D. Schronen et R. Urbé (dir.), Caritas-Luxembourg, Luxembourg, 2007, pp. 191-203.
  • MAESSCHALCK, M. et BLÉSIN, L., « Apprentissage social et participation locale. Les enjeux de l’autotransformation des pratiques », in Les Cahiers philosophiques, n° 119 : Pouvoirs et démocratie locale, Strasbourg, 2009, pp. 45-60.
• MAESSCHALCK, M. et LENOBLE, J., L'action des normes, Éléments pour une théorie de la gouvernance, Les Éditions Revue de Droit de l'Université de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, Québec, 2009, 451 pp.
• MAESSCHALCK, M. et LENOBLE, J., Democracy, Law and Gouvernance, Ashgate, 2010, 268 pp.
  • TRUSSART, N., « Publics et expérimentations », in Multitudes, 2005/4, 23, pp. 169-179, édition mise en ligne le samedi 10 février 2007, accessible à l’adresse http://multitudes.samizdat.net/spip.php?article2243.
  • ZASK, J.,  « L'enquête sociale comme inter-objectivation », in B. Karsenti et L. Quéré (eds.), La croyance et l'enquête: aux sources du pragmatisme, Paris, Éditions de l'EHESS, 2004, pp. 141-163.