Maine de Biran
Anne Devarieux, Victor Emma-Adamah
Journal for Continental Philosophy of Religion February 13, 2025 DOI: 10.1163/25889613-bja10080 (opens in new tab)
Study at a glance
AI-extracted from the abstract| Characteristics | Theoretical or philosophical paper Peer reviewed |
|---|---|
| Key points | Argues that Maine de Biran's thought should not be classified as "spiritualist," since Biran treats materialism and spiritualism as speculative systems opposed to inner experience and the science of humankind. The force Biran identifies, which alone grasps the feeling of effort or sense of self, is not spiritual if "spiritual" means detached from matter and physiological conditions. Debates over spiritualism and materialism, the author contends, turn on the ambiguity between the self (moi) and the soul (âme). |
Abstract
Why do we still persist today in describing Maine de Biran’s thought as “spiritualist,” even though it sets materialism and spiritualism back-to-back as speculative systems – already present in embryonic form within Cartesian doctrine – that run counter to inner experience and the true science of humankind? This article revisits the genesis of the discovery of a force that, according to its author, alone proves truly capable of grasping the feeling of effort or sense of self, something that no prior metaphysical or physiological explanation had succeeded in articulating. Such a force is not spiritual if by “spiritual” we mean a force divorced from all matter and any physiological conditions of its realization. Consequently, as Biran repeatedly insists, all discussions of spiritualism and materialism revolve around the ambiguity between the self (moi) and the soul (âme). To be a philosopher of consciousness, must one be a spiritualist?