In this article, we propose to question the accuracy of Jean Wahl’s definition of Vladimir Jankélévitch’s Philosophie Première (1953) as one of the “ultimate efflorescences of negative theology.” In fact, we maintain that—although conceiving the apophatic discourse as a necessary (but insufficient) stepping-stone to the absolute—the aforementioned work constitutes, if anything, an effort to overcome it by means of what we shall call a tesiphatic philosophy, i.e., one that identifies the first principle, not as the absolute negation of being, but (...) as the absolute position of being. To defend our thesis, we shall start by discussing the meaning of the five divine names that Jankélévitch bestows upon his absolute, namely, (1) the “totally-other-order,” (2) the “super-truth,” (3) “the itself,” (4) the “I-know-not-what,” and (5) the “almost-nothing.” In this section of our paper, we will try to show how Jankélévitch’s discourse is, in fact, shaped by the whole negative theology tradition (from Plotinus to Nicholas of Cusa). Finally, in the last part of our paper, we will strive to reflect upon Jankélévitch’s interpretation of the limits of a apophatic metaphysical discourse, questioning whether his Philosophie Première effectively overcomes negative theology’s conception of the absolute. (shrink)

With the disenchantment with independence in Africa, economic failure, the crimes of the elites from the independence years, the paralysis of symbolism, and finally the states' loss of dynamism, the 1990s ushered in a so-called phase of democratization. This was about rethinking citizenship and the relationship to politics. This democratization was a response to the notion of diversity. This paper claims that the answer to this diversity issue fell far short of expectations and proceeds different examples taken from social, cultural (...) and political life, including the struggle for recognition and the appearance of terrorist violence in sub-Saharan Africa. Multiparty systems designed to respond to the diversity question produced only many versions of the same by ignoring that true diversity is the encroachment on the same of the strange, the different and the unexpected. (shrink)