Ricoeur on ‘Humanisme et terreur’

The Case for the Prophet

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticleScientificpeer-review

    Abstract

    Ricoeur’s thought bears a number of marks from his reading of the work of Merleau-Ponty. In this article, I argue that this also accounts for the nature of his political thought. I bring Ricoeur’s reviews of Humanisme et terreur (1947) to light in order to show how his confrontation with Merleau-Ponty marked an important turning point in his political thought. Firstly, I show that Merleau-Ponty’s defense of Marxism provoked Ricoeur to reflect upon its intrinsic pathology, and how this marked a significant change in Ricoeur’s political position, namely, from Marxism to personalist socialism. Secondly, I explain how Ricoeur’s reading of Humanisme et terreur gave rise to a preliminary expression of ideas that would later become lasting and essential concepts of his political philosophy. More specifically, the pathology of Marxism would later become embedded in his theory of the political paradox and the concept of the prophet lived on in his reflections on civic responsibility.
    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)433-448
    JournalChiasmi International
    Volume18
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - 2016

    Fingerprint

    Prophet
    Marxism
    Political Thought
    Pathology
    Intrinsic
    Turning Point
    Responsibility
    Thought
    Socialism
    Political philosophy
    Civics
    Confrontation
    Paradox

    Cite this

    @article{740e79dce947493697c160560276cb19,
    title = "Ricoeur on ‘Humanisme et terreur’: The Case for the Prophet",
    abstract = "Ricoeur’s thought bears a number of marks from his reading of the work of Merleau-Ponty. In this article, I argue that this also accounts for the nature of his political thought. I bring Ricoeur’s reviews of Humanisme et terreur (1947) to light in order to show how his confrontation with Merleau-Ponty marked an important turning point in his political thought. Firstly, I show that Merleau-Ponty’s defense of Marxism provoked Ricoeur to reflect upon its intrinsic pathology, and how this marked a significant change in Ricoeur’s political position, namely, from Marxism to personalist socialism. Secondly, I explain how Ricoeur’s reading of Humanisme et terreur gave rise to a preliminary expression of ideas that would later become lasting and essential concepts of his political philosophy. More specifically, the pathology of Marxism would later become embedded in his theory of the political paradox and the concept of the prophet lived on in his reflections on civic responsibility.",
    author = "Dries Deweer",
    year = "2016",
    doi = "10.5840/chiasmi20161834",
    language = "English",
    volume = "18",
    pages = "433--448",
    journal = "Chiasmi International",
    issn = "1637-6757",

    }

    Ricoeur on ‘Humanisme et terreur’ : The Case for the Prophet. / Deweer, Dries.

    In: Chiasmi International, Vol. 18, 2016, p. 433-448.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticleScientificpeer-review

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - Ricoeur on ‘Humanisme et terreur’

    T2 - The Case for the Prophet

    AU - Deweer, Dries

    PY - 2016

    Y1 - 2016

    N2 - Ricoeur’s thought bears a number of marks from his reading of the work of Merleau-Ponty. In this article, I argue that this also accounts for the nature of his political thought. I bring Ricoeur’s reviews of Humanisme et terreur (1947) to light in order to show how his confrontation with Merleau-Ponty marked an important turning point in his political thought. Firstly, I show that Merleau-Ponty’s defense of Marxism provoked Ricoeur to reflect upon its intrinsic pathology, and how this marked a significant change in Ricoeur’s political position, namely, from Marxism to personalist socialism. Secondly, I explain how Ricoeur’s reading of Humanisme et terreur gave rise to a preliminary expression of ideas that would later become lasting and essential concepts of his political philosophy. More specifically, the pathology of Marxism would later become embedded in his theory of the political paradox and the concept of the prophet lived on in his reflections on civic responsibility.

    AB - Ricoeur’s thought bears a number of marks from his reading of the work of Merleau-Ponty. In this article, I argue that this also accounts for the nature of his political thought. I bring Ricoeur’s reviews of Humanisme et terreur (1947) to light in order to show how his confrontation with Merleau-Ponty marked an important turning point in his political thought. Firstly, I show that Merleau-Ponty’s defense of Marxism provoked Ricoeur to reflect upon its intrinsic pathology, and how this marked a significant change in Ricoeur’s political position, namely, from Marxism to personalist socialism. Secondly, I explain how Ricoeur’s reading of Humanisme et terreur gave rise to a preliminary expression of ideas that would later become lasting and essential concepts of his political philosophy. More specifically, the pathology of Marxism would later become embedded in his theory of the political paradox and the concept of the prophet lived on in his reflections on civic responsibility.

    U2 - 10.5840/chiasmi20161834

    DO - 10.5840/chiasmi20161834

    M3 - Article

    VL - 18

    SP - 433

    EP - 448

    JO - Chiasmi International

    JF - Chiasmi International

    SN - 1637-6757

    ER -