Le défi moral de l’empirisme moderne : Scudéry et ses caméléons
Recent Historiography presents the debate on chameleons between Perrault and Scudéry as a static opposition between two epistemologies: a mechanistic empiricism versus an empiricism that is a priori moral and, therefore, more respectful of the integrity of its object. This article aims to show that...
Enregistré dans:
| Auteur principal: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article ou chapitre numérique |
| Langue: | Français |
| Publié: |
2024
|
| Sujets: | |
| Accès en ligne: | Accès Université d'Orléans et IFPM Accès Université d'Orléans et IFPM |
| Résumé: | Recent Historiography presents the debate on chameleons between Perrault and Scudéry as a static opposition between two epistemologies: a mechanistic empiricism versus an empiricism that is a priori moral and, therefore, more respectful of the integrity of its object. This article aims to show that it is, on the contrary, Scudéry’s rigourous empiricism that underpins its morality. By reinvesting two essential criteria of this empiricism, “preparation” and “variation”, and by discussing the resulting etiology, Scudéry shows, on the same ground as Perrault, (1) that the latter does not make consistent use of the epistemological principles on which there is consensus in the learned community he represents, and (2) why she can, in her own words, “challenge” him. |
|---|