-
I believe that French philosophy has a unique way of looking at things and thinking that differs from German or English philosophy. However, I do not have time to think and write about it in detail at this time. I will simply write what I have told others or written on occasion, as it comes to mind.
- Descartes is the originator of rationalistic philosophy. However, when one reads his memoirs Meditationes and other works, one immediately notices the intuitive nature of his thinking. It is not merely conceptual or logical. It is intuitively appealing. To borrow a phrase from Pascal (Blaise), there is not just l’esprit de géométrie the spirit of geometry, but l’esprit de finesse the spirit of delicacy. French philosophy is characterized by the latter. Even those who follow the same school of Descartes may compare marle blanche and spinosa, and they may be halfway to the same conclusion.
-
The French, who are considered artistic by nature, can be said to contemplate through the senses. They see deep thought in sensual things. The French word “sens” has a meaning that is difficult to translate into other languages. It is neither “sense” nor “sinn. It is not “sense,” nor “sinn,” nor “sinn,” nor “sinn,” nor “sinn,” nor “sinn,” nor “sinn,” nor “sinn. But I think the foundation of French philosophy’s unique introspective philosophy was laid by Pascal. The “knowledge by heart,” connaissancepar coeur, constituted the philosophy of main de bilan as “sens intime” sense of interiority, intimacy, intimacy, and finally reached the ternary of [Bergson. Maine de Bilan was the kind of philosopher that Pascal praised as a ceux qui cherchent en gémissant one who groans and searches.
-
Sans,” which is neither “sense” nor “jin,” can be thought of as internal in one aspect and social or common sense in another. It is an intuition unconstrained by concepts. It is a “sance” for the reality that expresses itself, the historical reality. In this sense, it can be said that Monte Carlo was a pioneer in looking at the world from this standpoint.
-
He is indeed a non-philosophical philosopher. His “Essays,” in which he discusses everyday subjects in a routine manner, contain truths that are sometimes more than exaggerated systematic philosophy.
-
The world of historical reality is the everyday world (which is both the Alpha and Omega of philosophy). The self he describes is the self that lives in the everyday world. But from there we can also go immediately to the world of Pascal (Blaise)‘s “thought-”, which is the world of the great ordinary man. He is the great ordinary man. It could be said that Montaigne taught the French how to see and think in this way. From there you can go to the so-called moralists of La Bruyère and Vovenarg., but you can also go all the way to the philosophy of Maître de Villain and Bergson.
-
When I first came to Kyoto, I was very much in tune with [Bergson. I first became aware of Bergson when I was still at Shiko High School. At that time, the name Bergson was still unknown to the world, and I did not know who he was. But at the time, I was focusing on the idea of pure experience, and the title of the book, Sur les données immédiates de la conscience (“An Essay on the Direct Endowment of Consciousness,” published by Iwanami Library under the title “Time and Freedom”),” lured me in. I was lured by the title of the book, “An Essay on the Direct Endowment of Consciousness. However, it was the German translation of Einführung in die Metaphysik “Introduction to Metaphysics” that first captured Bergson’s spirit.
- I also recall that I had an early interest in Maître de Bilan, but it was difficult to obtain a copy of his own book. However, it was difficult to obtain his books. After coming to Kyoto University, I was able to purchase a copy of Naville’s Oeuvres inédites de Maine de Biran Unpublished Works of Maine de Biran from the school, which allowed me to read his later works, such as Fondements de la psychologie Foundations of Psychology and Anthropologie short for “New Essays on Anthropology”, and so on. Even now, I sometimes quote words like J’agis, jeveux, donc je suis I act, I will, therefore I am. However, I have never been able to get hold of anything published by [Cousin. Thus, I could not read the famous first article on the distinction between passive habit and active habit until the recent publication of the complete works of Tisserant. The distinction between active and passive habits is an interesting insight. He came out of the sensationalism of Kondiyak. and, while defending that position, went instead to a subjectivist-idealist position. I think this is what makes the philosophy of Saint Anne’s Team unique and different from German and English philosophy. Habits are not usually considered to have an important philosophical role, but in the philosophy of ravesson and others, habits play a fundamental role in the world view. Ravesson was influenced by shelling, and it is interesting to note that Schelling’s identification with ravesson is thought to have become a habit in Ravesson through the influence of Maître de Villand. It shows how similar ideas differ between Germany and France. The same is true of the Maître de Villain and others that emerged from Condillac’s school, which was influenced by Locke’s empiricism. Of course, Condillac’s sense may not have been the same as that of Locke.
-
Rationalism in French philosophy is not merely conceptual. There is already something visual where Descartes says clare et distincte clarity revealed. In the writings of the best French thinkers, one senses what Schopenhauer likened to the deep, clear waters of the Lake of the Swiss. I feel this in the work of Henri Poincaré, for example.
-
I do not know how things were in Japan at the beginning of the Meiji era (1868-1912), but I would say that we were influenced by English philosophy before around 1900, and by German philosophy after around 1900, until the present day. I do not doubt the excellence of German philosophy, but as I mentioned above, French philosophy has something unique to it that is not found in German or English philosophy. Rather than being caught up in a conceptual system that is surprisingly poor in content, I believe that it is superior in its intuitive way of looking at and thinking about things. I think that Greek philosophy had both a deeply contemplative conceptual part and a beautiful artistic, intuitive part. The Germans introduced the former, and the French introduced the latter.
https://www.aozora.gr.jp/cards/000182/files/1049_40744.html
This page is auto-translated from /nishio/フランス哲学についての感想 using DeepL. If you looks something interesting but the auto-translated English is not good enough to understand it, feel free to let me know at @nishio_en. I’m very happy to spread my thought to non-Japanese readers.