From the book
The Notebooks of Joseph Joubert, Volumes I–II
Joseph Joubert · Diotimos Editions · 2026
Browse this book’s lexicon →Orientation
At a Glance
- The wordThese terms distinguish orientations toward matter and spirit, but Joubert can separate an explanation’s method from its author’s sentiments and doctrine.
- In JoubertThe claim that a people makes spiritualism out of materialism describes a transformation in reception, not a simple transmission of an unchanged theory.
- In this editionThe English translation retains spiritualism without importing the later sense of communication with the dead.
- A place to beginThe receiving people transforms one orientation into the other.
- English renderings
- materialism; spiritualism; materialist
Meaning
These terms distinguish orientations toward matter and spirit, but Joubert can separate an explanation’s method from its author’s sentiments and doctrine.
Use in the book
The claim that a people makes spiritualism out of materialism describes a transformation in reception, not a simple transmission of an unchanged theory. In a reading note, explanations can be those of a materialist even though sentiments and doctrine are wholly opposed to materialism. A later fragment places compact materialism and subtle spiritualism in contrasting regions of light and peace, ending with sylph and gnome. These changes of setting matter: a mode of explanation, a received belief, and a figurative region are not identical objects.
Places to read
- I, p. 220, entry 1, ¶1The receiving people transforms one orientation into the other.
- I, p. 437, entry begun p. 436, no. 5, ¶3Explanatory method is distinguished from opposed sentiments and doctrine.
- II, p. 677, entry 9, ¶1Compact and subtle regions lead to the sylph/gnome comparison.
Translation in this edition
The English translation retains spiritualism without importing the later sense of communication with the dead. The two damaged residues in the II.677 fragment stay visible rather than being certified as le and ces. Present “are” beside past “were” in the reading note follows the source’s distinction.
Source note
Beaunier 1938, I, pp. 220, 437; II, pp. 677.