Pharos, center for study and research in philosophy, art and the science

Statement of policy

edited by Roberto Barbanti e Luciano Boi

"The separation of fields is merely a human convenience, and an unnatural thing. Nature is not interested in our separations, and many interesting phenomena bridge the gaps between fields". Richard Feynmann
"What produces progress in philosophy, and in the sciences as well, is the invention of concepts, and this invention is always produced in solitude, independence and freedom, yes, and in silence. There is no shortage of conferences; what comes from them today? Needless collective repetitions. We are cruelly deprived, however, of monasteries with peaceful cells and the quiet rules of cenobites, of anchorites". Michel Serres

I) Introduction
We hope to found a center which can offer philosophers, scientists and artists, people from different fields of research, a friendly and humane space which will be conducive to the development of theory and to fruitful and disinterested exchange on the problematics and stakes of knowledge and its current practices. Our intention is to create a hearth which radiates warmth, a personal and quiet place, where it is possible to reflect, meditate, discover, "work and create," in sum to rediscover one's own time. We think it necessary to rediscover the time to think, for human and intellectual time can be neither manipulated nor subjected to artificial accelerations.
Our aim is to develop theoretical reflection which brings out, beyond delimited disciplinary fields, the relations, ties, concords and discords among the different fields of research and their classes of corresponding phenomena, be they of a scientific, esthetic, philosophical or anthropological nature. The objective is thus to help bring to light the inner ties among apparently diverse phenomena.
Another pressing need of our time is to reflect upon the meaning and the epistemological impact of the boundaries inherent in projects of scientific modeling and formalization (which claim to be whole and integral) of natural and vital phenomena. In this connection, it seems to us that we must take account of the important differences which exist, for example, between the mathematical structure of a phenomenon and its ontological, phenomenological, or even symbolic signification. These differences correspond to levels of signification which are essentially diverse, such as those among physical (inorganic), vital (organic) and historico-anthropological phenomena (meta-organic).
One of the fundamental premises of a new philosophical vision of nature and spirit must be, it seems to us, that of proposing and exploring diverse models of knowledge. In other words, we cannot claim to apply a priori the results and methods appropriate to one class of phenomena to other classes with a profoundly different scientific, philosophical, or esthetic status. Such an attempt would be tantamount to the adoption of a reductionist point of view. On the contrary, it seems to us that a new philosophical vision must research the essential significations and the theoretical and esthetic value of objects and phenomena. Indeed it is necessary to re-valorize the specific differences which exist among the different disciplines as well as the practices which would favor their interaction and coexistence. But it is also necessary to escape today's widespread tendency toward a facile spiritualism, which in effect proposes nothing but a vague, albeit dogmatic syncretism. And it seems more and more clear that we cannot confine ourselves to functional and applied uses of scientific, philosophical or artistic theories. Such a vision has already lead to a considerable impoverishment, as much in our practices as in our cultural and social models of individual and collective life. It will be a question of going to the opposite extreme, of revealing, beyond the immanent existence of each object and of each concept, a spectrum and a horizon both actual and potential, of significations, meanings and values in which the subject must feel himself fully implicated.

II) Objectives
We propose therefore:
-A place outside established institutional settings, free of all academic and pedagogical constraints, and without pre-established disciplinary boundaries.
-A place where each specific field of research can return to more generalized theoretical and methodological questions. The study and practice of each discipline, moreover, must be constantly nourished by interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary reflection.
-A secluded place which facilitates invention and creation, intellectual work, study and meditation. Secluded, but not detached from reality nor from the historical and social issues which constitute part of reality, with which we wish to establish a dialectical and constructive confrontation.
-A place which is conducive to the germination of a new critical conception of scientific, philosophical and artistic work, independent of all possible application and free from all economic and/or political conditionings. Knowledge has no other end than its own exercise: its validity, its depth and its truth do not depend on its technological and industrial effects. Quite the contrary, it must be primarily a source of discovery, of comprehension of reality, of pleasure and of freedom.
-A place which offers the opportunity to develop a relation with different forms of functioning worldviews in which we might participate, not merely as spectators but as fully involved subjects; and also to develop a relation with the forms (perceptible and imperceptible) through which the creative capacities of nature manifest themselves in its multiple modes of life. It is a matter of rediscovering a deep connection between the internal dynamics and the intrinsic beauty of natural forms on the one hand, and an ethical and esthetic sensibility on the other. To develop itself, this sensibility must try to grasp the transformations and conversions possible within objects and organisms as well as the new forms which they can engender.

III) Epistemological premises of the project
One of the central questions which, it seems to us, must draw all our attention and upon which the very destiny of human knowledge is staked can be formulated as follows: "Must we resign ourselves to considering science as a 'device which produces truth' or 'formulas which work,' or must we rather attribute to scientific knowledge a dimension which is self-reflexive with regard to everything which does not arise directly from its own models and concepts?" We think it is urgent to develop an epistemological perspective which is much more sensitive and open to the plurality of phenomenological and ontological significations hidden in objects and beings.
It seems to us in effect that science is at once implicated in a historical process inherent in the creation of its own concepts, and in a more global evolutionary process which is tied to the biological, cognitive and anthropological development of the human species. From this point of view, one must recognize that the principal objective of science consists less in furnishing absolute truths or valid formulas for all contexts, than in contributing to a progressive understanding of the multi-dimensionality and multi-modality of meaning always through an ever deeper comprehension of the properties of objects and their connections with organisms and living beings. In other words, it is impossible to separate scientific research and the philosophical reflection which accompanies and often precedes it, from a research into the deep meaning of things and from the theoretical weight of knowledge. But we must not hide the fact that this separation does in fact take place within the framework of the reductive limits of the more and more dominant monism of technical and technocratic thought. Thus we are undertaking the development of a rationalism which is critical, open and inspired by a certain Renaissance humanism.
In order to enrich scientific, philosophical, and artistic reflection with new ideas, it seems to us important to consider what, for example, we might call the origins of our perception and the roots of our comprehension of the beings which inhabit the world around us and whose reasons and ends for existence and behavior we must explain. The different forms of knowledge (scientific and humanistic), of intentional consciousness, of imagination and intuition which nourish our creative and spiritual activity, demand equally to be rehabilitated and re-actualized.

IV) Thematics and esthetic stakes of the project
The esthetic dynamics of the twentieth century have completely redefined the contents, the modes of research and the perspectives inherent in the universe of art. In this vast and complex panorama, certain problematics seem to impose themselves with force.
The theoretical and practical implications of the birth of different forms of technical memory, and thus of spatio-temporal transmissibility (acoustic, visual and, more recently, tactile, sensori-motor, etc.) as well as the contribution and the impact of "techno-logical" innovation in its ensemble, have created the conditions for a new reflection upon space and time. The problematics relative to form, as well as the notions of subject and work, have been subjected to sweeping critical reexamination. The artistic object and product have been confronted with the emergence of activities centered on immateriality, temporality and on the conceptual dimension; these activities forecast important formal, practical and theoretical repercussions.
Modifications and shifts in the esthetic dimension toward an ethical positioning have repeatedly echoed these transformations.
The weakening of the aesthétikos (as purely physico-sensorial relation), which manifested itself at the beginning of the century, the "de-constructive" practices which followed as well as the invasion of technological images, have coincided with the thematization of anthropological , social, material, and contextual aspects. This process has contributed to a convergence and a progressive identification of art and existential dynamics.
A final problematic which we think is emerging today concerns the relation between artificial and natural beauty. This problematic is again seeing the light of day and seems to place in question again the Hegelian esthetic ideas which until now have been dominant.
These elements must be reconsidered in their ensemble, so as to identify the possible determinations of an esthetic-artistic thought and practice which are capable of resisting the injunctions of the market and of an institutional politics which oscillates between self-conservation and an acquiescence to forms of thought and attitude which are essentially transitory.
It is an established fact that it is especially vis-à-vis the technological phenomenon and its new injunctions that discussion and substantial research must be developed, taking into account the relations between rationality and the unconscious, between technical calculability and poetic character, between episteme and utilitarian data.

V) General theoretical objectives
The center intends to develop research around five fundamental themes, without thereby excluding other contributions of problematics.

a) The relation between subjective perception and its natural foundations
The crucial point of a reflection on perception must be, it seems to us, the comprehension of its multi-modal nature and of its different levels: physical, mathematical, esthetic and symbolic. Another aspect which warrants delving into concerns the modes following which the integrating (contextual) mechanisms of perception interact with the action of physical and psychic pregnances which can invest a phenomenal object with new values and new significations. It is likewise a matter of better understanding the way in which our perception is deployed within an evolution of organisms and human beings which is at once historical, biological and anthropological. However, far from being a simple epi-phenomenon of this evolution, it enriches it with singular experiences and new designs.

b) Reflection upon forms, morphogenesis and dynamics of phenomena
Any reflection upon morphogenesis must begin with the realization of the fact that natural phenomena and biological forms, in addition to interacting with exterior milieus, are endowed with an internal dynamic and a capacity for self-organization. Some recent research shows that Darwinian and neo-Darwinian theories are too reductive to permit an understanding of the endogenous but equally holistic character of the context in which fundamental biological processes (i.e., embryogenesis, ontogenesis and organogenesis) evolve and create individuated organisms.

c) The question of form and organism and their new epistemological and ethical implications
The scientific and technological revolutions of the last century depend on the axiom that nature is indefinitely controllable and manipulable, and that its resources are inexhaustible. One of the most dramatic consequences of this conception is a form of thought which affirms that man can and must exercise absolute power over natural phenomena, bending them to his needs and ends. This unilateral vision of the relations between man and nature is perhaps the principal reason for certain upheavals which have penetrated the equilibrium of certain micro- and macro-systems, both natural and cultural. Man's unilateral attitude has also asserted itself over nature in the form of technological appropriation and the exploitation of natural resources with, in many cases, complete misunderstanding of the living character and the universal value of nature. It seems obvious today that if we want to re-establish a certain reciprocity and internal equilibrium in natural and cultural phenomena, the philosophical and esthetic relations of human beings toward nature must change radically. Nature is first of all a source of knowledge of new phenomena, as well as a source of substances and physical, chemical, and biological properties whose transformation and production may turn out to be essential to the maintenance and growth of organisms. But it is also a place of vital development which invites respect and contemplation, even in the conflicts which this inevitably involves.
Today much depends on developing the capacity to distinguish between man's purely functional and utilitarian relation to nature, guided by technology, and a cognitive and contemplative dimension in which nature is something to know, discover and understand.
A paradigmatic situation with which we are confronted today involves problems tied to developments in the biological sciences and to various projects for the manipulation of living organisms and most particularly the human organism. The latter raise fundamental philosophical questions since they put back into discussion the very notions of nature, culture, and liberty. So as to develop a new conception of the relations between man and nature, the objective must not be that of enslaving nature to the powers of man, but rather of uniting man's capacities for intervention with awareness and with the ethical responsibility which awareness involves.

d) The relations between truth and beauty, scientific research and metaphysical reflection
One of the false ideas transmitted by positivism and scientism consists in making us believe that truth is the preserve solely of science, and that beauty is entirely foreign to the scientific renderings of the real world. In reality, most of the fundamental scientific discoveries of these latter centuries show clearly that beauty is a motive and a motor for knowledge. One must understand here that by beauty we mean especially the ensemble of harmonic relations, symmetries and intrinsic esthetic factors which characterize the structure and meaning of a scientific theory.
Whether it is a question of mathematics, physics, or of any other natural or historico-social science, the search for the intrinsic criteria of the beauty of phenomena appears to be one of the principal factors of the intelligibility of the world.
Thus one cannot continue to maintain a duality between truth and beauty, for this has already led to disastrous separations among theoretical research, scientific applications, and the educational and esthetic functions of knowledge. The latter presents an immanent and transcendent dimension which must be constantly valorized and reactualized.

e) The hermeneutic value of intuition and the poetic
In the hurried context of a general desire for efficiency and profitability, it seems to us necessary to reaffirm the value of personal, deeply interior approaches to phenomena which fully bring out their poetic and intuitive dimensions. Through these two terms we wish to conjure up the ontological and methodological openness which Aristotle attributed to the poet and, by opposition, to that of the historian. In effect, the latter "says what has been, and the poet what one can expect" (Poetics, 145b).
It follows from all this that the spirit of the Pharos Center must be founded upon a challenge to the paradigm of applied knowledge, in awareness of the fact that, as the French mathematician and philosopher René Thom says, "to predict is not to explain". In Pharos, we wish to create an international center of reference whose activities will be focused upon philosophical and esthetic meanings to be given to the new developments in the natural and human sciences in recent decades. A space open to creative contributions which fall expressly within the scope of this project. We aim moreover to valorize the specificity and singularity of a local "taking root," an aim which must be expressed in an authentic and open dialogue with the communities already functioning in the region in intellectual, socio-economic and spiritual domains. We propose to stimulate discussion which calls upon a plurality and a synergy of approaches within the non-alienated logic which animates them, and with the explicit desire to research and operate within the framework of the theoretical and the poetic.

Paris, May 1999

The center has its seat in the monastery of San Domenico (XVIII century), which is located in the community of San Leo, the Province of Pesaro and Urbino, The Marches Region (Italy)