Face-to-face , first term, 30 hours of theory.

First term
Tuesday from 13:30 to 15:30 at 43 Botanique 6

French.

This course in the BAS3 program aims not only to present and discuss in depth the question of symbolism, central in sociology and anthropology (and more broadly in the human and social sciences), but also to consider possible applications and repercussions. of this question through contemporary issues, addressed in part through classical questions (the symbolic function and the role of language, culture and the imagination, the study of myths and rites, symbolic effectiveness and its conditions, the question of belief and illusions, the tension between "active life" and "contemplative life", etc.), but also on the other hand through recent problems or those which have acquired a new acuity (the "demand for meaning ”and the“ meaning resources ”between interpretative and pragmatic approaches, meaning and the“ bringing into play ”of meaning, the components of a“ symbolic economy ”in current social configurations - see in particular what escapes an axiomatic of need and interests -, the new ways of "inhabiting the world" in an era which requires questioning productivism and rethinking our relationship to "nature", the question regimes of belief and knowledge in a world that can be said to be both “disoriented” and marked by pluralization and decentring, the challenges and dead ends of the cultural and interpretive turn - are we doomed to “relativism”? see the distinction between cultural relativism and methodological relativism -, the virtues and the limits of deconstructionist approaches, the metamorphoses of the religious fact, the rise in importance of issues linked to mental health and to the "language games" of psychology, 'experiential and psychic well-being ...).

For the Bachelor in History :

For the Bachelor in Information and Communication :

For the Bachelor in French and Romance Languages and Letters : General :

For the Bachelor in Modern Languages and Letters: German, Dutch and English :

For the Bachelor in Philosophy :

For the Bachelor in Political Sciences: General :

For the Bachelor in Sociology and Anthropology :

None

As indicated in the learning objectives, it will be a question of approaching the classic question of the symbolic system through problems and questions that are both original and having a current impact. The theoretical course will consist of two parts and will be supplemented by an involving activity in the form of reading texts.

In its first part, the theoretical course will aim to present a series of benchmarks, conceptual resources and clarifications in relation to the question of the symbolic, approached mainly from the entry through language, and declined from the following sequences: 1) the model of classical symbolism, sometimes called the model of "correspondence" (or adequacy of language, words or even signs, with regard to what they refer to, or real things); 2) the hermeneutic or interpretative turn, or taking into account the consequences of the linguistic and historical condition of the human being (of the “conflict of interpretations” from the exegesis of religious texts in the context of the Reformation and the wars of religion, the relativism of the "masters of suspicion" and the "romantic reaction"). 3) Social symbolism (Durkheim, Mauss ...) and the linguistic turn in structural version (Saussure ...): from structuralism (Lévi-Strauss ...) to poststructuralism (Derrida, Foucault, "French Theory", "deconstruction »...). 4) The pragmatic turn (or the linguistic turn in a pragmatist version from Peirce, Frege, Wittgenstein, Austin ...), or the primacy of practices as the basis of a pragmatic agreement with the world, through language (acts of speech, institutions of meaning ...) as a medium for possible intercomprehension.

Through this theoretical course, which we will try to make as lively and as accessible as possible, we will tackle a series of remarkable and significant points of debate, for example around the definition of the symbol, signs or representations. , around the question of “the origin of languages”, around the distinction between “hermeneutic of depths” and structural analysis “of the surface” (differences or contrasts between signs or signifiers), around the “hermeneutic circle” and of "perspective" (see the famous sentence attributed to Nietzsche: "there are no facts, there are only interpretations"), around the interpretation of "mana" by Durkheim, Mauss and Lévi- Strauss, around the “performative” dimension of language, around the thesis of untranslatable and “hermeneutical charity”, around the relativistic or non-relativistic consequences that can be drawn from the “linguistic turn” (depending on whether one is in the “poststructuralist / deconstructivist” filiation or in the “ pragmatist / realistic ”, taking account here of the Anglo-Saxon distinction between realist and realistic), etc.

In its second part, the course will be less theoretical and more applied, in other words it will involve engaging certain concepts, from a resolutely socio-anthropological perspective, in order to take up again a series of questions related to symbolic dimension of human life forms, and to put them to the test by taking into account the transformations of current social configurations.

This year, this second part of the course will be devoted to an exercise which will consist in first presenting certain elements of the sociology of religions of Max Weber, then in a second time to broaden the perspective by asking oneself to what extent and according to what modalities Weber's approach would make it possible to analyze certain contemporary issues around what we could call the administration and appropriation of symbolic goods, including not only “salvation goods” (level of the religious field), but also resources and personality supports considered from the angle of psychic well-being (level of the field of mental health and psychology). In other words, we will try to transpose certain elements of Weberian sociology from the religious field to the study of the field of the psychic and mental health (this field being constituted here as a socio-anthropological object in its own right). It will not only be a question of sketching out an analysis of the field of the psychic (of the personality, of the experiential, etc.) by drawing inspiration from the sociology of religions according to Max Weber, but attention will also be paid to in anthropological and historical perspective of the categories and techniques which are constitutive of this field (from the notion of "psyche" to "technologies of the self", etc.).

The theoretical course is completed by readings of texts that the student must perform on his own (implicit activity). The knowledge of the subject of the theoretical course and that of the complementary texts are the subject of an evaluation during the same examination (see below).

In the course of the lecture, the professor exposes the theoretical aspects and the elements of problematization. It introduces students to the conceptual development exercise, using illustrations, and taking empirical objects as analyzers and outlets for the analysis models that are proposed.
The teacher also gives keys to read and adapt more easily the texts that are part of the reading portfolio (see below).
Students are invited to ask questions and to debate, the small size of the audience allowing an interactive pedagogy.

The theoretical course is completed by a text portfolio.
It is expected that students read these texts thoroughly, understand them and appropriate them (it is strongly advised to make a personal synthesis of them).
Knowledge of compulsory reading is assessed on the examination.

The course should be given in face-to-face mode, unless the sanitary conditions do not allow it. In this case, we will switch to a remote mode (according to modalities to be specified).

Oral exam.
The EU evaluation has two components whose weight in the overall score is calculated as follows:

- knowledge of the subject of the theoretical course: 60% of the overall mark (12/20)
- knowledge of additional texts: 40% of the overall score (8/20).

Note that the part relating to the reading of texts will be taken into account only if the student obtains at least one third of the points for the part of the examination corresponding to the theoretical course (4/12, on basis of minimum 2 Questions). Indeed, the part of the exam on the theoretical course evaluates basic skills which, if they are not acquired, do not allow to consider to take into account the reading part of texts. In other words, it is considered that a deficiency that is too serious in terms of basic skills (less than 4/12) can not be compensated by knowledge of texts with a complement status. The principle applied here refers to a logic of learning outcomes and not an arithmetic logic. If the text reading part is not taken into account at the evaluation level, the score out of 12 is adjusted in score out of 20 according to a rule of proportionality: 1/12 = 1.66 / 20 rounded to 2/20; 2/12 = 3.33 / 20 rounded to 3/20; 3/12 = 4.99 / 20 rounded to 5/20.

The evaluation method is unchanged in the second examination session.

Clarification referring to the context of a “health crisis” (covid-19): at the time of writing this descriptive sheet, we can announce that the objective is to organize an oral exam which will take place face-to-face; if the sanitary conditions do not allow it, the examination will remain oral but will switch to remote mode.

See instructions given during the course.