Le fondement ontologique du récit selon Ricœur: mimesis, dette et attestation
Le fondement ontologique du récit selon Ricœur: mimesis, dette et attestation

Summary/Abstract: I examine the problem of what Ricoeur calls représentance, which is a stand-in narratives off er of what took place (in the case of historical narratives) or actions (in the case of the re-telling of what people did). Ricoeur rejects as insuffi cient two naïve options: fi rst, a simple adequacy between what took place and the historical narrative about it and, second, a simple heterogeneity between them so that historical narratives would be mere “possible versions” of what took place. I explore further why Ricoeur brought into consideration the attitude of the one off ering the narrative, what he calls a “being-in-debt” or “attestation”. I then off er an assessment of Ricoeur’s success in still claiming that what actually happened serves as the ultimate referent of the narratives given of the past event or the action.

• Details
• Contents