In A Secular Age, Taylor introduces the idea of porous subjectivity by way of elucidating the mode of being typical of the enchanted pre-modern world, and juxtaposes it to the buffered self typical of the disenchanted modern world. The framing of the problem in this way, with the argument so clearly oriented as an attack on the latter position, risks a polarization that defaults to the former as the preferred option. These, though, are not our only choices. There is much (...) to recommend Taylor’s notion of porous subjectivity as distinct from the buffered self of atomistic individualism. But Taylor associates the emergence of the disenchanted world with disengaged reason, and the existence of an enchanted world with a deeper mode of engagement in the world. If we instead focus upon modes of engagement with the world separate from the question of enchantment, we can perhaps further our understanding of human subjectivity and relations with others. (shrink)

Although Ricoeur and Taylor are often grouped together, their conceptions of language, literature, and practical reason are very different. The first half of this essay focuses on Ricoeur's theory of triple mimesis and narrative, showing how his attempt to synthesize Kant, Husserl, and structuralism results in a formalism that blocks out the ontological, hermeneutical, and historical dimensions of literature and practical reason. The second half of the essay develops Taylor's ontological conception of public imagination and illustrates the dynamics of this (...) conception of language and interpretation by showing how literary works debate with each other over language, subjectivity, and reference. Narrative does not just order; it argues. (shrink)

Cette contribution tentera de cerner les enjeux de l’interprétation contrastée de la philosophie des Lumières proposée par Charles Taylor. Pourquoi le déisme et le matérialisme sont-ils perçus par Taylor comme des fourvoiements de la modernité? Pourquoi considère-t-il que les Lumières ont méconnu la manière dont la subjectivité pouvait fonder ses aspirations morales et politiques? Nous verrons que la philosophie des Lumières « radicales », selon Taylor, produit une morale et une politique incohérentes : elle postule que l’harmonie sociale procède de (...) l’intérêt bien compris grâce à une ingénierie législative et éducative ; mais elle n’explique pas pourquoi l’idéal d’une société harmonieuse mérite d’être poursuivi. L’auteur des Sources du moi entérine de la sorte l’idée répandue d’une incohérence des philosophes matérialistes : leur psychologie hédoniste et égoïste est incompatible avec leur éthique, qui vise le plus grand bonheur du plus grand nombre. Les Lumières sont donc rendues responsables d’une vision contradictoire de la morale et d’une vision appauvrie de la subjectivité. (shrink)

This paper aims to come to grips with the rich philosophy of Charles Taylor by focusing on his concept of ‘strong evaluation’. I argue that a close examination of this term brings out more clearly the continuing tensions in his writings as a whole. I trace back the origin of strong evaluation in Taylor’s earliest writings, and continue by laying out the different philosophical themes that revolve around it. Next, the focus is on the separate arguments in which strong evaluation (...) is central, uncovering several methodological conflicts in Taylor’s strategies. Arguing against most of his commentators, I suggest that a distinction should be drawn between the philosophical anthropological, moral, and ontological implications of strong evaluation. As a result, the contribution of this paper is threefold. First, it clarifies the issue of strong evaluation by distinguishing the different arguments in which Taylor employs the concept. Second, it makes the case for multiple tensions within Taylor’s methods. Third, as a consequence, this analysis not only enables us to evaluate the potential and limits of his subject-centered philosophy but also separates his objectivist claims from his theories of human subjectivity, opening up the question of the metaphysical status of his ontological view. (shrink)