Dear members,
Erik wrote: "I suspect the roots of the concept are earlier. In French
the expression is 'du bon sense', which I would translate as 'good
judgement'. In Dutch it is 'gezond verstand', sound judgement. I wonder
if the expression has anything to do with the Aristotelian 'sensis
communis' the sixth sense, which coordinates the impressions coming from
the other five. Common sense is valued much higher in analytical
philosophy then in other styles. I think this has something to do with
the English view on life, although I'm not sure what."
To which François added: ""Sens commun" is also used in French... and I
would not say that translating 'du bon sens' as 'good judgment' is quite
right."
To my understanding, the French expression "sens commun" still stands as
the opposite of scientific knowledge and, for that reason, as the
equivalent of the term "opinion". The "sens commun", in this specific
sense, will be the equivalent of the classical "doxa". Of that which
follows the "sens commun", we will say it is "orthodoxe". Of what which
doesn't, we will say it is "heterodoxe" or "paradoxe". Deleuze already
explained that " Le bon sens est l?affirmation que, en toute chose, il y
a un sens déterminable ; mais le paradoxe est l?affirmation de deux sens
à la fois » (Logique du sens, 1969). In this perspective the "sens" is
"good" (bon) because it is the one recognized by the majority, it is the
one glorified by the majority (which is, by the way, the second meaning
of the greek term "doxa"). Traditionally we use to see in what doesn't
follow the "bon sens" / "sens commun" something bad. For the logician, a
paradoxe is a problem to be solved. For Foucault (and Deleuze) however,
the paradoxe is a point of departure for a reflexion. But aren't they,
at the same time, questioning the strict division between scientific
knowledge and common knowledge?
Is there a difference - or not - between the reading I just gave of the
"sens commun" and the "sensus communis"? Maybe a line can be traced
between "bon sens" and "sens commun". Or maybe we could find this line
within the word "commun" which ambiguously refers both to "vulgar" and
to "community" (at least in French).
To whoever who has the ability to read French : you?ll find within this
online PhD dissertation a good history of the concept of ?sensus
communis?, from Aristotle to the ?kantian turn? :
http://www.theses.ulaval.ca/2004/21927/21927.html
Philippe