Search

This article will analyze imposture as a kind of values’ confusion. It will take as an example the neoliberal claim to make the entrepreneur the teacher of the 21th century. Such a rhetoric makes a common sense based on two schemes well identified by Foucault, the schema of “compensation of values” from German ordoliberalism and that of “convertibility of values” from human capital theory. What are the intellectual tools that would enable us to dispel the neo-liberal rhetoric’s confusions ? Neither the Platonic way to decide rivals’ claims (from entrepreneur and teacher) according to an Idea of the school nor the Pascalian theory of worths seem practicable in a problematic world. We will take the modest path of pragmatism that develops an anti-reductionist strategy by defending pluralism and irreducibility of values. The theory of “language games” from Wittgenstein can then offer the appropriate tool for a philosophy, even a pedagogy of discernment.

This paper tries to show that by crossing the fundamental theses of Dewey’s philosophy of education and its specific attention on school training, it is possible to develop criteria able to equip educational vigilance: the opening of the training, its character of praxis, renouncing of theory and practice‘s dualisme, meaning of enquiry. Any process of training can be modeled in a triangle which clarifies logics and problematics of them. The model also highlights difficulties articulating its logics to give them the importance which return to them in the specific configuration of every training : professional, didactic or socio-psychologycal. The thought of Dewey comes at the same time to consolidate and to question this modelling. Il explains many drifts of training.

During the educational crisis of the 1960s in the United States, intellectuals like Hannah Arendt blame educational thought of John Dewey. He would promote chidren’s self gouverning, emphasize the pedagogical approach at the expense of content, substitute the know how to knowledge. The charges are indefinitely repeats by anti-pedagogical criticism raging in France since the 1980s. This article attempts here to make the difference between the real pedagogical thinking of Dewey and the drifts from some of his followers, drifts Dewey convicted himself. But these excesses have contributed to the misinterpretation of the pragmatist philosophy of education. It will also point out the critical resources of the thought of Dewey in respect of a number of past and present educational presuppositions, so called common sense.

Nowadays, the idea of the problem invades the school and training. How to avoid that this idea does not dilute and caricaturizes itself? It seems necessary to go back to the root question: What is problematization? The genesis of the paradigm of problematization is studied here departing from 4 problem philosophies from John Dewey, Gaston Bachelard, Gilles Deleuze and Michel Meyer. While these philosophies come up from different intuitions and develop their own theories, they largely converge on the idea of problematization which allows a precise definition of concepts (the problematization, the problem, the issue). These philosophies also allow to highlight the intellectual demands of an attitude that seems to take its normal course of the common thought and even - according to some of our authors - of philosophical thought,marked precisely by the forgetfulness of the problem. There is no problematization if self-control of thought is not present, a dialectic between data and conditions of the problem, which needs to conceive a logic of research, centered in the building of the problem and not just on its corresponding resolution. It is possible to outline the pedagogical implications of the four sketches, studied in relation to knowledge and problem. Their differences reveal themselves pedagogically over determined: they send back to the problems of a pedagogy of the problems.

A ideia de problema invade, atualmente, a escola e a formação. Como evitar que esta ideia não se dilua e se caricature? Parece ser necessário voltar à questão de raiz: o que é problematizar? Estuda-se, aqui, a génese do paradigma da problematização a partir de 4 filosofias do problema: John Dewey, Gaston Bachelard, Gilles Deleuze e Michel Meyer. Ainda que estas filosofias se manifestem a partir de intuições diferentes e desenvolvam teses próprias, elas convergem largamente sobre a ideia de problematização o que permite uma definição rigorosa de conceitos (a problematização, o problemático, a problemática). Estas filosofias permitem, igualmente, evidenciar as exigências intelectuais de uma atitude que parece ter de fazer o percurso normal do pensamento comum e até - segundo alguns dos nossos autores - do pensamento filosófico, marcado precisamente pelo esquecimento do problema. Não há problematização se não for instaurado um autocontrole do pensamento, uma dialética entre dados e condições do problema, o que necessita conceber uma lógica da pesquisa, centrada na construção do problema e não apenas sobre a respetiva resolução. É possível delinear as incidências pedagógicas dos quatro esboços estudados quanto à relação entre saber e problema. As suas próprias divergências revelam-se pedagogicamente sobre determinadas: reenviam para os problemas de uma pedagogia dos problemas.Nowadays, the idea of the problem invades the school and training. How to avoid that this idea does not dilute and caricaturizes itself? It seems necessary to go back to the root question: What is problematization? The genesis of the paradigm of problematization is studied here departing from 4 problem philosophies from John Dewey, Gaston Bachelard, Gilles Deleuze and Michel Meyer. While these philosophies come up from different intuitions and develop their own theories, they largely converge on the idea of problematization which allows a precise definition of concepts (the problematization, the problem, the issue). These philosophies also allow to highlight the intellectual demands of an attitude that seems to take its normal course of the common thought and even - according to some of our authors - of philosophical thought,marked precisely by the forgetfulness of the problem. There is no problematization if self-control of thought is not present, a dialectic between data and conditions of the problem, which needs to conceive a logic of research, centered in the building of the problem and not just on its corresponding resolution. It is possible to outline the pedagogical implications of the four sketches, studied in relation to knowledge and problem. Their differences reveal themselves pedagogically over determined: they send back to the problems of a pedagogy of the problems.L’idée de problème envahit actuellement l’école et la formation. Comment éviter que qu’elle ne se dilue et se caricature ? Il semble nécessaire de remonter à la question radicale: qu’est-ce que problématiser ? On étudie ici la genèse du paradigme de la problématisation à partir de quatre philosophies du problème: John Dewey, Gaston Bachelard, Gilles Deleuze et Michel Meyer. Bien que ces philosophies se déploient à partir d’intuitions différentes et développent leurs thèses propres, elles convergent largement sur l’idée de problématisation, ce qui permet une définition rigoureuse des concepts (la problématisation, le problématique, la problématique). Ces philosophies permettent également de mettre en évidence les exigences intellectuelles d’une démarche qui semble devoir remonter la pente normale de la pensée commune et même – d’après certains de nos auteurs - de la pensée philosophique, marquée précisément par l’oubli du problème. Il n’y a pas problématisation si n’est pas instauré un auto-contrôle de la pensée, une dialectique entre données et conditions du problème. Ce qui nécessite de concevoir une logique de la recherche, centrée sur la construction du problème et pas seulement sur sa résolution. Il est possible d’esquisser les incidences pédagogiques des quatre problématologies étudiées quant à la relation entre savoir et problème. Leurs divergences mêmes s’avèrent pédagogiquement surdéterminées: elles renvoient aux problèmes d’une pédagogie des problèmes.La idea del problema invade, en la actualidad, la escuela y la formación. ¿Cómo evitar que esta idea no se diluya y se caricature? Parece necesario volver a la cuestión de raíz: ¿Qué se cuestiona? Se estudia aquí la génesis del paradigma de las preguntas de las 4 filosofías de problemas de John Dewey, Gaston Bachelard, Gilles Deleuze y Michel Meyer. Mientras que estas filosofías se manifiestan a partir de intuiciones diferentes y desarrollan sus propias teorías, estas coinciden en gran medida en la idea de cuestionar, lo que permite una definición precisa de los conceptos (el cuestionamiento, el problemático, el problema). Estas filosofías permiten también poner de relieve las exigencias intelectuales de una actitud que parece hacer el curso normal del pensamiento común, e incluso - según algunos de nuestros autores - del pensamiento filosófico, marcado por el olvido, precisamente, del problema No hay ningún cuestionamiento, si una auto-reflexión no es establecida, una dialéctica entre los datos y condiciones del problema, lo cuál es necesita diseñar una lógica de la investigación, centrada en la construcción de problema y no sólo en su resolución. Es posible esbozar las implicaciones pedagógicas de las cuatro abordajes y estudiar la relación entre el conocimiento y el problema. Sus diferencias se revelan pedagógicamente de manera sobredeterminada: enviar de vuelta a los problemas una pedagogía de los problemas

A expressão "fazer de sua vida uma obra" tornou-se um slogan que necessita ser questionado. Com efeito, se lembrarmos a distinção aristotélica entre ação e produção, práxis e poiese, não se trataria de uma confusão de categorias? Podemos conceber a vida como um modo de produção? Se for de fato uma produção artística, o que significa então pensar a vida sob uma modalidade estética? Não seríamos levados a explicitar as tensões que não deixam de se manifestar entre estética, ética e moral? Enfim, "fazer uma obra de sua vida" supõe antes de tudo desdobrá-la sob a forma de narrativa para poder avaliar o que nos conduz a explorar - na direção de Paul Ricoeur (1984; 1985) - os dilemas da escrita de si.

What means today finding a way in education? We shall analyze the transformations which affect henceforth the educational normativity and the double sliding which takes place from the imperative to the conditional way, without that it is still possible to take into account a principle of reality. In such a perspective, on what marks can indeed follows the educator? If we cannot follow the traditions or the Nature and if the idea of progress is not any more obvious, the last way is to think of experience in its absolute immanence, as pragmatism knew how to make it. If the education does not any more consist in following and in making follow quite drawn roads, it is necessary to invent new types of marks. That is why we suggest investigating the metaphors of the compass and the map. Maps and compass impose no road but help the traveller to find his way. With the compass, the educated draws its own road but with the help of experience already there, registered on the map.

John Dewey’Ethics is a paradoxical thought, both secularizing Moral theory and keeping a requirement of Ethics of Grown. On the one hand Dewey against Eudaemonism, utilitarianism and kantism, refuses any moral principles a priori. He advises an free analysis of problematic situations characterized by conflicting values​​. In such a contextualism, principles become mere tools of intelligibility and resolution of a problematic situation in which the actors are involved. Dewey also refuses the dualisms of moral tradition: the Hume’s rule, the gap between ends and means. Rejecting any idea of Moral Consciousness or Practical Reason as separate faculties, but also ethical Emotivism, he advises ethical debate, an act of common intelligence applied to live together. On the other hand, from Emerson’s tradition, he takes, through all his writings, that life is education, grown, moral perfection. The requirement of grown’ethics is, for him, a counterweight to the secularization of morality. What about this articulation between moral minimalism and maximalism of ethics?

In this paper, we try to answer the question of changing conceptions from Gaston Bachelard’s point of view. From the example of teaching Kepler’s laws, it describes the cathartic strategies of the psychoanalysis of the knowledge. Changing conception means awareness (topical dimension), investments (energetic dimension), and intellectual supervision (dynamic dimension). Bachelard so defines a dialectic of continuity and break (and not cut) in which psychology is working to free the reason from epistemologic obstacles which hinder it. From this point of view, changing conceptions is thought as problématization, that is to take away from opinion to a rational knowledge.

BACKGROUND: PE and PE_PGRS are two mycobateria-restricted multigene families encoding membrane associated and secreted proteins that have expanded mainly in the pathogenic species, notably the Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex (MTBC). Several lines of evidence attribute to PE and PE_PGRS genes critical roles in mycobacterial pathogenicity. To get more insight into the nature of these genes, we sought to address their evolutionary trajectories in the group of smooth tubercle bacilli (STB), the putative ancestor of the clonal MTBC. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: By focussing on six polymorphic STB PE/PE_PGRS genes, we demonstrate significant incongruence among single gene genealogies and detect strong signals of recombination using various approaches. Coalescent-based estimation of population recombination and mutation rates (ρ and θ, respectively) indicates that the two mechanisms are of roughly equal importance in generating diversity (ρ/θ = 1.457), a finding in a marked contrast to house keeping genes (HKG) whose evolution is chiefly brought about by mutation (ρ/θ = 0.012). In comparison to HKG, we found 15 times higher mean rate of nonsynonymous substitutions, with strong evidence of positive selection acting on PE_PGRS62 (dN/dS = 1.42), a gene that has previously been shown to be essential for mycobacterial survival in macrophages and granulomas. Imprint of positive selection operating on specific amino acid residues or along branches of PE_PGRS62 phylogenetic tree was further demonstrated using maximum likelihood- and covarion-based approaches, respectively. Strikingly, PE_PGR62 proved highly conserved in present-day MTBC strains. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: Overall the data indicate that, in STB, PE/PE_PGRS genes have undergone a strong diversification process that is speeded up by recombination, with evidence of positive selection. The finding that positive selection involved an essential PE_PGRS gene whose sequence appears to be driven to fixation in present-day MTBC strains lends further support to the critical role of PE/PE_PGRS genes in the evolution of mycobacterial pathogenicity.

Molecular and phylogeographic studies have led to the definition within the Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex (MTBC) of a number of geotypes and ecotypes showing a preferential geographic location or host preference. The MTBC is thought to have emerged in Africa, most likely the Horn of Africa, and to have spread worldwide with human migrations. Under this assumption, there is a possibility that unknown deep branching lineages are present in this region. We genotyped by spoligotyping and multiple locus variable number of tandem repeats (VNTR) analysis (MLVA) 435 MTBC isolates recovered from patients. Four hundred and eleven isolates were collected in the Republic of Djibouti over a 12 year period, with the other 24 isolates originating from neighbouring countries. All major M. tuberculosis lineages were identified, with only two M. africanum and one M. bovis isolates. Upon comparison with typing data of worldwide origin we observed that several isolates showed clustering characteristics compatible with new deep branching. Whole genome sequencing (WGS) of seven isolates and comparison with available WGS data from 38 genomes distributed in the different lineages confirms the identification of ancestral nodes for several clades and most importantly of one new lineage, here referred to as lineage 7. Investigation of specific deletions confirms the novelty of this lineage, and analysis of its precise phylogenetic position indicates that the other three superlineages constituting the MTBC emerged independently but within a relatively short timeframe from the Horn of Africa. The availability of such strains compared to the predominant lineages and sharing very ancient ancestry will open new avenues for identifying some of the genetic factors responsible for the success of the modern lineages. Additional deep branching lineages may be readily and efficiently identified by large-scale MLVA screening of isolates from sub-Saharan African countries followed by WGS analysis of a few selected isolates.

Un des problèmes inhérents à la formation des enseignants qu’elle soit initiale ou continue est celui de la préparation des activités d’apprentissage. Ceci pose la question des rapports que les enseignants entretiennent avec les savoirs à co-construire avec les élèves et avec les savoirs issus de la recherche, comme la situation-problème par exemple. Notre projet est d’amorcer un travail avec des enseignants pour comprendre ce qui fait difficulté dans leur pratique et plus particulièrement dans leur préparation de classe. C’est dans ce sens que la démarche suivie se voudra heuristique visant à observer ce qui se passe chez un sujet singulier (enseignant) pour découvrir les mécanismes cognitifs et professionnels à l’œuvre et envisager des aides. Il s’agira donc de repérer les difficultés qui émergent de l’élaboration de situations-problèmes. Nous comparerons les points communs et différences que nous pouvons repérer chez les enseignants concernés par ce dispositif. Puis, nous montrerons comment cette recherche a fait évoluer notre conception de la situation-problème.

Pourquoi les recherches en Sciences de l’éducation ne fécondent-elles pas davantage les pratiques ? Pourquoi, inversement, les questions que les praticiens posent à la recherche restent-elles si souvent sans réponse ? Bref, pourquoi le monde de la recherche et celui des pratiques n’arrivent-ils pas à se connecter ? Nous nous centrerons ici sur un réseau pédagogique de formation continue de l’enseignement agricole intitulé « Enseigner Autrement ». Ce réseau pédagogique tente donc de mettre en contact des produits de la recherche et des enseignants en formation, volontaires et motivés mais non « experts » qui tentent de répondre à l’injonction à problématiser présente dans les nouveaux curricula. Une analyse inspirée de la psychanalyse de la connaissance de Bachelard s’efforcera de mettre à jour, chez les praticiens, un certain nombre d’obstacles épistémologiques qui grèvent la compréhension de ce que serait un savoir vraiment problématisé. Nous donnerons également quelques exemples du travail pédagogique qui s’effectue au sein du réseau : par quelles médiations et par quelles opérations de traduction ce type d’espace intermédiaire tente de mobiliser des outils de la recherche pour questionner et faire évoluer les pratiques. Restera alors à comprendre comment, en retour, les activités du réseau questionnent la recherche en sciences de l’éducation.

L’idée de problème envahit actuellement l’école et la formation. Comment éviter qu’elle ne se dilue et se caricature ? Il semble nécessaire de remonter à la question radicale : qu’est-ce que problématiser ? On étudie ici la genèse du paradigme de la problématisation à partir de quatre philosophies du problème : John Dewey, Gaston Bachelard, Gilles Deleuze et Michel Meyer. Bien que ces philosophies se déploient à partir d’intuitions différentes et développent leurs thèses propres, elles convergent largement sur l’idée de problématisation, ce qui permet une définition rigoureuse des concepts (la problématisation, le problématique, la problématique). Ces philosophies permettent également de mettre en évidence les exigences intellectuelles d’une démarche qui semble devoir remonter la pente normale de la pensée commune et même – d’après certains de nos auteurs – de la pensée philosophique, marquée précisément par l’oubli du problème. Il n’y a pas problématisation si ne sont pas instaurés un auto-contrôle de la pensée, une dialectique entre données et conditions du problème. Ce qui nécessite de concevoir une logique de la recherche, centrée sur la construction du problème et pas seulement sur sa résolution. Il est possible d’esquisser les incidences pédagogiques des quatre problématologies étudiées quant à la relation entre savoir et problème. Leurs divergences mêmes s’avèrent pédagogiquement surdéterminées : elles renvoient aux problèmes d’une pédagogie des problèmes.

On confond trop souvent le pragmatisme avec une forme sophistiquée de l’utilitarisme sans comprendre que James, Peirce et Dewey nous obligent en réalité à renouveler notre vocabulaire de la pratique. En deçà des différents courants du pragmatisme et de ses dissensions internes, le noyau dur du pragmatiste est constitué d’une théorie conséquentialiste et non représentative de la signification et de la vérité. L’idée est un outil et non une image du monde, ce qui récuse le dualisme qu’opère le sens commun entre la théorie et la pratique, entre le concret et l’abstrait. Il y a donc loin de l’attitude pragmatique au pragmatisme : le pragmatisme n’est ni un utilitarisme ni un praticisme. Loin de promouvoir cyniquement une culture du résultat, le pragmatisme (et en particulier celui de Dewey) s’intéresse surtout au processus par lequel l’expérience s’accroît et s’approfondit, ce qui est l’essence même de l’éducation tout au long de la vie.

Dewey pense l’éducation comme adaptation. Cela nous fait-il sortir de l’idée éducative de l’école de la modernité, telle que Durkheim la définissait comme unité d’esprit de l’enseignement, accès à l’encyclopédie et conversion ? Contrairement aux conceptions réductrices de l’adaptation condamnées dans les débats actuels sur l’école, l’idée d’adaptation chez Dewey se distingue d’un ajustage utilitariste et n’assigne à l’éducation aucune fin extérieure à elle-même. L’adaptation n’est autre que l’expérience toujours remaniée et cette expérience est éducative. Dewey ne réduit pas les intérêts de l’éducation aux intérêts sociaux du moment, mais il pense l’éducation comme processus continué, dans lequel le sujet se forme en modifiant son milieu social. Certes l’adaptation enveloppe un schème de continuité qui tranche avec la « volte-face » qu’implique la conversion, mais pour l’essentiel, la pensée de Dewey reste dans l’idée éducative de la modernité dont elle achève la sécularisation : elle désacralise sans dévaloriser.

Dans « L’intuition de l’instant », ce commentaire de la Siloë de Gaston Roupnel, Bachelard, aux prises avec l’obstacle épistémologique de la durée bergsonienne, nous livre ses confidences de lecteur. Lorsque la lecture nous met en présence d’un texte qui nous interpelle et met à mal nos représentations, cette situation critique enclenche un travail d’apprentissage que l’on peut qualifier de problématisation. Elle implique un travail sur le langage, une reconstruction de schèmes alternatifs, une re-conceptualisation. Chez Bachelard, la problématisation est vécue et éprouvée avant d’être théorisée.

La problématisation tend à s’imposer comme un nouveau paradigme qui touche toutes les dimensions de la société. Le retour de l’acteur sur les scènes politiques et sociales requiert de concevoir l’agir comme gestion des problèmes. C’est particulièrement le cas lorsqu’il s’agit de penser les incidences concrètes de l’idée de développement durable et ses implications politiques, en rupture avec le modèle technocratique habituel et dans le cadre d’une démocratie participative qui entend associer le citoyen, non seulement aux décisions, mais également, dans une certaine mesure, à la définition des problèmes eux-mêmes. Toute la question est de savoir si la formation des experts s’avère à la hauteur de ces nouvelles exigences et parvient à intégrer véritablement le paradigme de la problématisation. Nous nous centrons ici sur la formation des techniciens supérieurs agricoles (gestion des milieux naturels).

Le débat scolaire et la rhétorique pamphlétaire qui l’accompagne n’en finit pas de reprendre des oppositions binaires en une sorte de Western stérile. Le débat piétine. Les oppositions frontales conduisent à se crisper sur des thèses ou sur des positions idéologiques, voire corporatistes. Le questionnement philosophique revient toujours, ici comme partout, à tâcher de s’élever du niveau des solutions à celui des problèmes, ce qui change immédiatement les termes du débat et les frappe de nullité. On prendra comme exemple les querelles que suscitent les conceptions de la culture scolaire et de son rapport à la « culture des élèves ».

Si la pédagogie sociale vise à produire dans la société globale ou dans un secteur spécifique un changement de représentations, d’attitudes ou de manières de faire, elle ne peut évacuer la question du type de changement à opérer. Ce changement peut en effet se penser dans plusieurs cadres : behavioriste, lewinien, psychanalytique ou autre. Dans notre société devenue pédagogique (Beillerot, 1982) il est à craindre que malgré les incantations réitérées à la nécessité d’une prise de conscience, les modifications visées ne relèvent davantage de l’inculcation de standards de comportements.

On peut ranger les problèmes sous trois rubriques très générales : les énigmes, les échecs et les controverses. Ce sont comme les trois figures du Sphinx, le lion-femme-oiseau ! (Fabre, 1999). Cet article traite d’une controverse. Nous avons déjà étudié des débats scientifiques en classe (Orange, 2005), des problématisations scientifiques, celles de Claude Bernard sur le milieu intérieur (Orange, 2003). Mais qu'en est-il du débat d’idées ou de société ? Se laisse-t-il appréhender de la même façon ?1

The highly successful human pathogen Mycobacterium tuberculosis has an extremely low level of genetic variation, which suggests that the entire population resulted from clonal expansion following an evolutionary bottleneck around 35,000 y ago. Here, we show that this population constitutes just the visible tip of a much broader progenitor species, whose extant representatives are human isolates of tubercle bacilli from East Africa. In these isolates, we detected incongruence among gene phylogenies as well as mosaic gene sequences, whose individual elements are retrieved in classical M. tuberculosis. Therefore, despite its apparent homogeneity, the M. tuberculosis genome appears to be a composite assembly resulting from horizontal gene transfer events predating clonal expansion. The amount of synonymous nucleotide variation in housekeeping genes suggests that tubercle bacilli were contemporaneous with early hominids in East Africa, and have thus been coevolving with their human host much longer than previously thought. These results open novel perspectives for unraveling the molecular bases of M. tuberculosis evolutionary success.

Ministerial circulars call not only for awareness-raising, but for a real “youth mobilisation” against global warming. These recommendations concern the neutrality of the school space within the republican framework. In order to depart from recurring debates in France, we propose here to take a detour through America, with the Little Rock affair and the Hannah Arendt’s paper about claims of the State to initiate the process of social desegregation by ordering public high schools to integrate black students. But engaging youth in adults political struggles, it is not betraying education ?Yet many tensions into Arendt's political philosophy suggest resting the problem of school neutrality in a less radical way when the subject concerns preservation of life, that is a necessary, although insufficient, condition of education. But, on the other hand, what to think mobilizing students by inculcating "good practices" without promoting reflection ? In short, if the school, as an institution, is to serve as a relay for public policies, how should it perform the role assigned to it ? Shouldn't youth mobilization take other forms than enrollment ?

The proliferation of the « Educations with » request to be studied by epistemological, ethical and political points of view. As far as they are linked with “Social Controversial Issues”, the “Educations with” seem come from a self questionning problematic world. From epistemologic point of view, they are Ill structured problems, in a broaded sense, involving not only cognitive but normative dimensions. Teaching these notions come up again several obstacles : scientist reductionism, hypertrophy of the axiologic dimension, moralism of good pratices. This work argues for a problematologic approach of these objects, and for an education to wisdom for social responsabilities.

In french curriculum, the PSHE (Personal Social and Health Education) seem to import values’ considerations beyond traditional knowledge. That is controversial. But this weberian dualism (facts versus values) must be critiqued. From Habermas, every knowledge is linked to human interests and, in the other hand, you can discuss about values and critic them with rational arguments. This paper is trying to show that Habermas’ thinking guide the PSHE, despite of their ambiguities, to emancipatory goals. Their meanings would be to support the democratization movement, and his communicational interest, which, in contemporary societies, put up technocratic management of problems mistaking politics for expertise. This perspective criticizes postmodern relativism that often supports the PSHE. That thereby regains Enlightenment and Condorcet’s thinking.

In France, there is no consensus between traditional political parties, on the left wing as well as the right about secularism. It takes different kinds of words: "open", "positive", "intransigent", "intelligent", etc. The aim of this paper is to describe the uses of this polysemic notion and to understand the origin of the conflicts between secularists. The rise of Islam, and above all, of Islamism, increase these tensions by the reintroduction of issues that the law of 1905 had regulated on the legal plane, but which remain on the ideological level: such as separation of politics from religion, sovereignty, identity and spiritual meaning. Thus tensions between liberty, secularism and worship’s equality are becoming very hard.