An anti-foundational manifesto / Q&A and discussion / The work & legacy of Ludocivo Geymonat / Q&A and dicussion

0:00 So I was very confused and unhappy and spent years trying to figure this out. I came across an author named Imre Lakatos, who wrote a beautiful book that these two schools were of the same thing. He called it Foundationalism. It's like saying that the Baptists, the Methodists, and the Presbyterians, they were all fighting each other, but they were all Protestants. They accepted the idea that mathematics had a foundation, meaning it might have been somewhere with the absolute security and certainty. This was a reaction as to whether there is a foundation within which these different are variations. Then you have real foundations, I guess, or sometimes talked about. Is mathematics like a tall building that needs a foundation? Maybe in some way it is, but there are many different foundations. Is mathematics more like a 12-building, or is it more like a flying bird? It's obvious that the idea of a book is the best we can think of as a book. We're a skeptic about foundations. I'm more for foundations than I hope.

2:30 The circle isn't a poetry, it's a real thing that we know a lot about.

12:30 Because it's not mind, it's objective in that sense. It's independent of what any individual thinks.

15:00 It's abstract, it's transcendental, really. The world is made of physical matter. Out of this, life has arisen, and out of life, consciousness has arisen, and society, and poetry, and everything else. But it's all the idea that math deals with some other universe that has an independent existence, and it was always there before there was a solar system, and there later on.

17:30 And certainly many will disagree. But the first thing is that to say that it's not matter and nothing mind in heaven is erroneous. There are many things that are neither matter nor mind and in fact we're so familiar with them. Everything that is intersubjective, cultural, historical, social, all that stuff. But it's hard to deny this fact that there is a realm of the social and cultural existence. Of course it's not autonomous, we have brains, and the social and cultural doesn't exist without individual people and physical manifestations, but you can't just produce that, you can't talk about terms of electrons or individual dreams, there is a social and cultural realm that can be reduced to merely the mental and physical. So if there is a third piece of Then, obviously, you have to consider maybe mathematics is really in that other piece. Mathematics is something that makes some people very angry at saying that mathematics is part of the socio-cultural realm that degrades it or insults it.

20:00 All our great art, great music, all the great mental and intellectual creations of the human race are there. So it's not degrading or insulting to mathematics to make such a suggestion. It's certain that the subject, as effective as they look at the markets when they do something more, can't be just that hard to accept. It's because in mathematics we have definite solid knowledge. We are really sure about things. And that's not true in the rest of the social, in law, literature, so in mathematics we have theories. It's also true that in every other part of the social cultural realm there are definite facts. There are definite facts about music, there are definite facts about how you may behave in public in Memphis Hill, there are definite facts about the history of New York, and so on.

22:30 It's perfectly clear that saying something is in the sociocultural realm is not incompatible with saying that you can have definite firm knowledge. We have definite firm knowledge. Of course, mathematics is different from everything else in that realm. It's a special kind of thing. The sociocultural realm includes many, many very diverse kinds of things. And it's important to characterize mathematics as the special kind of thing it is, and that is a whole other effort that we must make and part from other things in the social culture. The recognition that that is the kind of thing mathematical objects are. They are concepts that we have in common that we understand so well that we can be quite sure about them. Social intersubjective concepts that are so clear and definite that we can reach virtual unanimity about them. That's a fact that we recognize and we call that mathematics. It's not so easy to answer, but people are working on it. Progress is being made linguistically, neurologically, History and so on. We will gradually come better and better to understand where mathematics comes from and how it's possible, but we can get out of this hypocrisy and dishonesty of pretending today that it's in the sky and tomorrow that it doesn't even exist and means nothing, both of which are dishonest and we don't really mean either of them, by just, I would say,

25:00 Plain ordinary fact, mathematics is a historically evolved practice of human beings that we do and we have concepts here that somehow are so sharp and mutually agreed on that we can feel virtual certainty about them and that have the property also that they have properties we don't know, right? We don't know. Lots of things. We know what we mean by the natural numbers, but we don't know whether the gold box conjecture is true. Is that paradoxical? No, it is not paradoxical that there can be social concepts which we know some things about and other things we can discover with effort and other things we may never discover. Because these are a kind of objective reality. Physical objects. Objective reality, the properties that we may know, the properties that we may never know. The same may be true of subjective reality, about what's in our own heads. The same can also be true about cultural, intersubjective reality. There are objects, like the national numbers, or whatever you want to think of, and we know what they are, we can talk about them, but we can't answer all the questions about them easily, or sometimes even with great effort.

27:30 But it's true. Well, perhaps everyone is wrong. Perhaps an entire country is. The interpretation theorem of step theory says that no one at his or her desk, suppose someone does precisely that. Now are you saying that we know that's impossible? And do we know how simple it is because everyone thinks it's impossible and agrees on it? Or is there some other basis for it? I guess that this goes back to a very old issue. I'd like to answer your question. One of the speakers today, I don't remember who, mentioned that the notion of absolute certainty in mathematics is very, very old. And has been a mainstay of philosophy, probably even before planning back to Pythagoras, and has been used by the possibility of absolute certainty and knowledge.

30:00 He really was actually with the synthetic a priori. He wanted to justify the behavior in mathematics. We just take it for granted. We can risk our lives for it. We have no knowledge. We have knowledge. And this is not due to the fact that everybody, everybody has decided that We have to believe in this fact and so this is our knowledge. We have some procedures which give us knowledge and these are not just only a social phenomenon, it's a social phenomenon but it's also something which has to do with how the matter which is in our brain or our mind works and produces some sort of scheme or way of looking at things that

32:30 Allow us to arrive at a certain objective conclusion. Do you have space in your vision for something which is not entirely conducible to commercial conventions or not? I agree with you that there is something in our brains or our nervous systems that makes mathematics possible. That there's something that human beings have in common and that is fundamental to our brains that makes it possible. We don't understand this very well, but we will come to understand it better. Now, you have to distinguish between different kinds of knowledge. I believe this is a glass of water. Okay? I'm pretty sure it is. Why? Partly I can see it is, but partly also, in growing up, I learned how to interpret. I learned this from my mother and said, it fits with physical reality, of course. If I had mind to think, well, if everybody wanted to think this was mind to work, then we would be able to think. So our belief in the reality of our perceptions, partly information of our senses, but it's a learned way of interpreting and basically goes back to Success is encoded with physical reality by the integrator as a whole. When you talk about five figures, you're talking about something physical. Then when you talk about ten to the tenth of a tenth, you're talking about an idea which we have developed. But we can share that idea and understand it together and work with it.

35:00 Because if you teach, you know that there are people who don't succeed in grasping this the way you disagree with it. So that's a different kind of reality. It's not at the same level as this is a glass of water, but it is a shared conception that is so strong and so universal that it's very reliable. And in my view, I can say that it is correct, that can be factored. That's a fact about a concept. There are concepts which are not material, I'm not saying that they exist in our shared world, but there are real facts about them that are true. And the validation is my thinking, is something that I learn in a social way. Does that get anywhere with your question?

37:30 This intersection of the circle or not, it certainly has something at least in mind, which singles it out in an exceptional way out of any other science that I can think of. Yes, I think that's a very important thing to do. I have made a book by Mark Steiner, maybe some of you have heard of it, not the exact title. We have a book, Strange Things Like... But this is not the kind of answer I would have expected here.

40:00 I think that the solution is to strongly emphasize the question of objectivity and the difference between objectivity and ontology. One of the basic philosophy of objectivity as different of ontology is transcendentalism. I've been called his philosophy a transcendental philosophy. That's not what I mean by the word transcendental. What I mean by the word transcendental is just platonic. In other words, that mathematics exists independently of human thought. I have taken a poll with a mathematics department with the following question, and you don't have to understand the words of the question to get the idea. Do you believe that the spectral theorem for undominated symmetric operators in Hilbert space was true before there was a solar system? And 75% said yes, of course. That's what I think cannot be sustained. It's just a natural way for people to feel that they know that the facts about unbounded, self-rejoined operators in Hilbert space are facts, whether we combine them or not, and they don't know anywhere else to put them. So they put them there. And I think that it's much more reasonable to say that these things became true once this theory was invented and once the question made any sense.

42:30 And that furthermore, which may be a little bit painful, once we are all gone, and this will happen, the human race is not forever. That's part of us. We have it. We made it. We worked on it. And it comes in close with us. I have a question. The names of philosophers and schools, it seems that you don't feel that your ideas fit into that scheme anywhere. But I was wondering, do you feel that your ideas are close to some? You might have thought of it. That's a very important question. I'm sorry. I give the impression I think I already did all this stuff myself. Of course not. I mention Lakotush as one of the philosophers who has pushed me a lot. There are other people who think along similar lines. Let me say, Wittgenstein isn't mentioned here. I think Wittgenstein is a very important figure in the philosophy of mathematics. Everyone knows he was a great philosopher, certainly. But on the other hand, mathematicians who look at his work on philosophy are really disappointed, because all he talks about is arithmetic, and he's completely wrong about that. But Wittgenstein had two points about it. He was actually right on one and wrong on the other. That was the misfortune. He said that something can be blue, it's not something out of the sky. Or it doesn't matter, that's ridiculous. Because he was following the tradition of Frege and Russell, who were platonists, and he rejected that and saw that mathematics was a human activity.

45:00 But unfortunately, he didn't see why. We don't have free choice to do what anyone would like. And it's surprising that someone so intelligent failed to see that. But that's one name that should be mentioned. Then there are a number of other people who have written things that I agree with. Raymond Wilder, you may have heard of him, a very fine mathematician who wrote books on mathematics as a cultural thing. Wilder was influenced by an anthropologist named Leslie White. They were close friends. Leslie White wrote a very fine article on this subject called The Locus of Mathematical Reality. This is referred to in my books and bibliographies. White's article is in the four-volume thing, World of Mathematics, by Newman, Newton, and McGill. These are not recent things, but White was an anthropologist. He published Anthropology, and philosophers simply don't pay any attention to that. Engelert Durkheim was a very great sociologist who emphasized that culture has a kind of autonomous existence. It's sort of, in a way, this idea has been expressed also by mathematicians. You know, it's a striking thing how often the same thing is discovered in mathematics independently at a certain time. Non-Euclidean geometry is a famous example, but there are many others. So, Shafarevich, the Russian algebraic geometer and antisemite, wrote to this effect that mathematics grows on its own and uses mathematicians to advance itself, which is a figure of speech in a way, but I'm just saying there is a lot of literature along these lines. A man named Paul Ernest wrote a book called Social Constructivism as a Philosophy of Mathematics, which I think is a fine book. Philip Kicher's book, The Nature of Mathematical Knowledge, in my recent book, I mentioned it. What is mathematics really? I am careful to name other people that I agree with. I shouldn't mention it in my talk.

47:30 Yes, but the other thing they wanted to say about the correspondence that we are surprised to find... Mathematics and the physical world. I think, I mean, one might think, but this is just coming out of my head, that it's kind of a natural selection of working on ideas in some sense. Are you familiar with the idea of memetics by Dawkins? These Darwinian philosophers. And then the idea that, I mean, the principle that ideas... These ideas go off and if they are finally useful, they survive in some sense. People always say that mathematics is useful, and of course we are happy with that, because this is our business, our work. But sometimes I was wondering if anyone has written something about useless mathematics. I mean, how many ideas do mathematics have? We are left as dead at some point, because we always name successful theories, but this was built exactly in every moment and they are dead. It's a fascinating question, much more to be done. I think that this is a fruitful area that people should be thinking about. I'm not aware of where they are going. Raymond Roddard is certainly an example. I think he wrote a quote where he used mathematical concepts quite a long time ago, and he attempted to deal with this kind of thing, how mathematical culture develops as an autonomous thing. I think Professor Mergers, if he had been here, he would have talked about that. But this kind of thing is more discussed in sociology, where philosophers don't pay attention to it, but generally speak language.

55:00 We also have the great profile of Ludovico Gemona. Ludovico Gemona was born in Turin, the same year when Peano published his formulario in 1908, and he died not far from then. In the last 21, say, 1891, it's a few days ago, a few days ago now, the ten-year-old has accepted to be a professor in Egypt because he was now estranged from Egypt during the 19th century, and insofar he has studied. He graduated in 1930 in theoretical philosophy with a dissertation which was discussed with a philosopher that most people don't even remember the name of, Ivano Pastore. He was a philosopher. It was well-married with their own gathering attention towards the problems of science within the philosophical discussion. So think of the period, that was 1930, so that was the cultural period of Italy. I believe it was really important, especially in the civil application of this problem, because we approach it with evidence. The official front of culture went to Chile, and the Manifesto of Fascist Intellectuals was egemonized by this political entrant, and through Karachi it eventually was egemonized also by the other entrant, that of the intellectuals who didn't subscribe to the regime, those anti-fascist intellectuals who signed the Conscious Manifesto. Science and art considered to have a cognitive value.

57:30 Ibn al-Bastura had made merit of opening a different path which was widely related to positivism that had been defeated by Neoplatonism. So Gemma Lauer was trained in philosophy but curiously enough Thanks to the new permit, permitted by the Argentina Reform of Universities in 1923 and 1924, he followed at the same time the courses of mathematics and physics degree, one and a half years after the philosophy degree, with a fee of $10,000. Dissertation that could be different from geometry. Hence, Ludovico Geronimo had a critique on a novelist's training. Ludovico Geronimo recalled his student years in which the whole testimony he gave was late 1980s, and he recalled that to follow both mathematics and mathematics courses, he had to mark up and down different floors of the University of Turin, There was a clear-cut separation between the mathematical and the philosophy students. In other words, he remembered that philosophy students only talked to each other, all the people who studied humanities, whereas mathematical students also talked to each other only. And, typing up and down the stairs, he found himself as being a kind of connection or link between these two groups and had the capability of making them talk to each other. That difficulty... It is translated in theoretical terms because it's a famous split which cannot be avoided. Professor Valadino pointed them out very clearly today. This is not only due to the human sciences and philosophical front, but also to... On the one hand, Kroce considered science as a practical discipline, and Kroce said that it could be a graduate cookbook. On the other hand, mathematicians had the responsibility of being closed within a specialization that was no longer able to highlight, to highlight the fully cultural value of their specific preparation. This will not be without consequence of the same formation of Gémanin, because there is a rather unique episode.

1:00:00 Gémanin graduated, as we said, in 1930 in philosophy and in 1932 in mathematics. In the summer of 1933, together with two of his friends, Roberto Bobbio, Eich, Renato Treves, makes a trip to Germany to improve his German and during this trip he has a lot of information, which he will then judge largely insufficient, of the ideas that were discussed and deepened. At the same time, in Neopositivism, he publishes a volume of his second work, the first being the Thesis of Laura published in 1931. He publishes a volume on the new philosophy of nature in Germany, in which he gives account of his first knowledge of the idea of Neopositivism. In this climate, however, Giovanà understands that the ideas of positivism are of great interest. And so, thanks to a scholarship that he had won at the University of Florence, a miserable scholarship, integrated with financial aid from his father, who belonged to a geologist, he decided to apply for a semester, 1934-1935, in Vienna. There is a biographical episode that I want to remember because it is emblematic. This is the result of the cultural problem I was talking about before. In Vienna, what does a young man do to enter an international cultural center of great prestige? He is made to have an excellent representation. And from whom is he made to do it? From the masters with whom he has worked. In one case, we said, an eminent mathematician, important, Vito Fubini, and on the other hand, Annibale Pastore, who did not have this international resonance, who, on the other hand, Fubini recognized. Fubini, in fact, soon after, in 1938, due to racial and fascist dissent, will be forced to... He will emigrate to the United States and, through the support of an American geologist, he will also be able to have a degree in American teaching. He presents himself with the letters of Fubini and Annibale Pastore, who say that this young man is valid, that he deserves to be welcomed with open arms by the Vienna Circle. But, as Hume Rai tells in this testimony, he gives the letters to the founder of the Vienna Circle, Moritz Schlick.

1:02:30 We realize that the colloquium is rapidly moving towards its end and we realize that these letters did not actually present it and the doors of the Viennese circle will be closed for him, with his own remorse. So, Schmink asks a question, more than anything, of courtesy to this young man and says, well, tell me what you did. He is obviously young, the Sunday of 1908, we are in the autumn of 1934. There can't be a great curriculum, so Ludovico tries to say what he did in those few years. Indeed, between 1930 and 1932, he did the voluntary assistant with Piano. And then, among many things he tries to present as his curriculum, he says, I also did the assistant of a professor in Turin, his name was Giuseppe Piano. At that point, the dialogue stops and he says, the great Piano. And at that point, the dialogue with Schlich has changed. And Gemona discovers the international cultural importance of Perna, not in Turin, where she studied, where she graduated, not even working alongside Perna, but she discovers it in Vienna. This episode is emblematic because it tells us how much it can influence the environment, the cultural environment, and how important it is to have the opportunity to change one's own perspective. Let's see for a moment this image that is projected. It is an image taken, as the autograph that is marked below says. In June 1985, at the State Hall in Milan, a meeting was held in honor of Gérard Monat for his departure from the university. This is the first work of Gérard Monat. The problem of knowledge of the positive universe. Basically, his thesis was published by Buch. As you know, he was an editor who had a cultural meaning in the books he had published. The piano form was published by Buch. What does this work do? It is a youthful work. It is the first work to recall all the idiosyncrasies of a formation that could be that of a young person, Schematik is aware that his high school education was done in a Jesuit school and we have checked the archives of this school in all classes, he was always the first in all subjects.

1:05:00 So he was a so-called model student. However, he was expelled from the Jesuit school because of a claim he made on Giovanna d'Arco, a claim in which he supported the fully human and concrete nature of this woman and not her holiness, which was obviously unacceptable for the Jesuit school. And then, with the scandal of the family of the time, the mother of Ludovico was a scarecrow of the daughter of a judge of the Italian High Court. He then had to enroll in a public school and he enrolled in the Massimo D'Azeglio School in Turin and as a colleague of Banco Pavese, Ebbrico in the previous class, Bobbio, he had other colleagues of study, Ginzburg, Milan, so a group that will do not only the house of Trice and Naudi but that will be a relevant group for the formation of Italian culture, especially in the Rimo. Emilio Gimona, who at the back of his formation is obviously an excellent student, he works with the Centro Dieci Club. With the praise and the right to print, he publishes this book in which he makes an interesting cultural operation, because he restores the tradition of positivism, trampling all, let's say, the intents of positivism and returning directly to the lessons of Comte. This operation is not easy, especially in the context of the Italian positivistic culture, which has managed to defeat the conflict with neodialysis. These are two fundamental ideas, one of which is related to the central decisive value of the culture of scientific knowledge and the other idea that Comte takes into account is the importance of the dimension of the historicity of scientific knowledge, so much so that in the second work The new philosophy of nature in Germany will always come out of the mouth, following that short journey we talked about before, with this title and this image that is a bit prudish. Well, in this book we will explore for the first time, and it is the first time that in Italy there is news of ideas that are always a bit... There is no specific idea of the circle of Vienna, but an idea that is contained in this book is that history is essential to understand the cognitive character of science.

1:07:30 However, as I said, Germont will consider these two works as the first ones, which will soon be completed, and in the course of the 1930s he works, especially after his return to the circle of Vienna, from 1935, on the deepening of the theses of positivism. However, we must not forget that when Hegel talks about science, in the 1930s, a discipline, mathematics, is above all present. In fact, in the 1930s, he also published a series of contributions, also showing with the theorems, what he called my theorems. And if you go and see these theorems, you will realize that they are written. With a general aprian style, they constitute generalizations, improvements of already known theorems, but these theorems are important because they indicate that when a student speaks of science, at least in the 1930s, he has a scientific discipline, mathematics, which is assumed as a practical model. This will obviously have some strengths, but it will inevitably also lead a student to have a vision with limits compared to a scientific understanding. However, in these years, if on the one hand he presents himself as a mathematician who wants to demonstrate some new theories, on the other hand he tries to put into a relationship his direct knowledge of this discipline, mathematics, with a more general philosophical reflection. These studies, these in-depth studies are published by the sages in academic works and especially on a small magazine, then a small magazine, which was the magazine of philosophy, which was officially directed by Luigi Fossati. But in reality guided, imposed and coordinated by a philosopher like Piero Quartinetti, and the name Piero Quartinetti today perhaps can say little, but in the cultural context of the time, I would say very much, not so much for his Catholic spiritualism and for this form of metaphysics that he had elaborated, but for a gesture that Piero Quartinetti had made to a small group of professors. We can add that this short lecture, which starts in 1925, has a corollary on the proposal of Giovanni Gentili in 1931, when the fascist regime asks for the approval of all Italian teachers and universities.

1:10:00 How many Italian teachers and universities are there? About 1,200. Of these 1,200 lecturers, only 12 refuse to swear loyalty to fascism. Well, of these 12, there is Martinetti, we could also add that of these 12, six are related to Turin, three because they are from Turin and three because they are of a Turinian background. This gives us a very interesting civil data, because if of these 12 lecturers, six are related to Turin, it means that in Turin there was a very particular civil and cultural climate. We could explain it by keeping it in mind. The interview that Germonat did in 1986, on occasion in a bibliographic file organized by another eminent figure of Italian philosophy, who worked in Milan, Mario Dalbrà, dedicated to a philosopher who today is very forgotten, but who instead is a fairly interesting figure, Hermione Uvalda. In the context of this testimony, Germonat says that the difference in the civil culture and in the culture of a city between Milan and Turin was of this nature. There were many intellectuals in Milan who signed up for the fascist party, even though they made an affront to fascism. In Turin this was not possible. If it derives from fascism, it was definitely anti-fascist. There were sudden changes. So, in this climate, Gémonat is linked to the figure of Martinetti on an ethical level, we could say. However, Martinetti directed, in the 1930s, Martinetti will die in 1944, the magazine of philosophy with great cultural interest and he loved to surround himself with young people with whom he freely discussed the most diverse theses. And precisely the magazine of philosophy hosts a series of studies by Gémonat dedicated to positivism. These are studies that span from an illustration of the fundamental theses of Neopositivism to a discussion of some specific problems such as the issue of the relationship between cause and effect, the interpretation of the priori in the field of Neopositivist reflection, therefore the relationship between Neopositivism and Kant.

1:12:30 These studies are then collected by Gemonat in 1945 in a volume that is its reference point. These are studies for a new rationalism that were published in 1945, or rather, if we look at the bottom of the book, this bottom is finished printing on April 25, 1945. And the date is not just an emblematic date, because if you read the warning with which the volume opens, you find this characterization in this new rationalism. The author says that this new rationalism must have the following characteristics. It must be critical in the first place. In other words, it is able to confront itself critically with the panorama of the tradition of rationalism and the other correct ones, the anti-rationalist ones. Secondly, it must be a new rationalism, so it must be able to take a step forward in the reflection of the tradition of rationalism. And thirdly, it must be a constructive rationalism, that is, it puts together a construction, a theory. And what is this theory that emerges from the volume? This is the Chinese doctrine of neopositivism. But you know that in neopositivism there were different souls. What is the soul whose guard is Shimonah? We said before that he had a predominantly mathematical formation. So it is not surprising to note that the soul whose guard is in neopositivism is the flesh-and-blood soul. So, above all, the hypothetical-deductible dimension of theories, above all, the importance... In the first three sections, the subject is discussed in a positivist way, according to this conventional curvature. In the fourth section, ethical problems are discussed, but they are discussed according to a clear ethic of Martiretti. The ethics of Martinetti was quite metaphysical and, above all, quite absolute. Now it is not the case to enter into the merits of Martinetti's ethical theories, but this language cannot be understood, and more generally the human figure cannot be understood, if we do not keep in mind what was the civil choice he made in the 1930s. This is my project, perhaps the first or second time it has been shown, because it is a very rare photo of Schumann taken during the partisan period.

1:15:00 Schumann's civil history may have been added, I will only give you some references. In 1929, he is a student of philosophy and begins to follow the first courses of mathematics, he finds in the library a group of students, Turinese, of letters, of philosophy, he is also the only mathematician, and these young people comment on an episode that has put the Italian culture on fire, because in 1929, as you know, Mussolini's regime comes out. To heal an open problem in the historical and civil Italian tradition, that is, the relationship with the Catholic Church. In 1929, in fact, the Lateranians were signed. You also know that in 1929 a single voice rose up in the Italian Senate to criticize this agreement. And it was the voice of Benedetto Croce who, recalling the liberal Mussolini replied the day after the intervention of Croce by giving the famous definition of Croce, the ambush of history, which in reality it is not clear what Mussolini meant except in the sense that Croce was an intellectual who, in the moment in which history had to wash its hands with the mud of history, Croce would have been placed in a position of follow-up from which he criticized... This group of young people live a feeling of anger at the insults that the head of state has made to this philosopher and decide to make a joke, if you will, but a joke of a certain meaning. They write a letter of solidarity on the cross. We can consider it a joke because these young people were seven times, they sign this letter, they pierce it, but alas they forget that ... They all live in a meditatorial regime where there is a censorship that that letter will never reach the church table, but it will reach, yes, the table of this Ritorino that arrests them all, arrests them all for offences to the head of the state, to the head of the government. The singularity of this letter is that if you look at the names of the signatories, you will find that they are all students, or of letter, or points of jurisprudence, but all philochroic, while Chaminat is the only anti-idealist.

1:17:30 So it is not, even now, considered a follower of the cross. In the first book, which was written in the second season, it is dedicated to a critical discussion of neodialysis. So why does Chaminat sign? A letter in favor of the defense of Croce, even though it is an anti-Crocian, but it is signed for a civil reason, because it is recognized in the criticisms that Croce has made with respect to the concordatum. They were all students, so you can consider that in those years being students meant to belong to a certain elite, and so there was a ruckus on the part of the judge. They spend a few weeks in prison and then they come ... We have been forced to sign a certain paper every Sunday morning for six months, but of course these young people are registered as anti-fascists. Gemona, unlike the other signatories of the letter, will be consistent with this choice of anti-fascist because she will never decide to join a fascist party. You know that in Italy the condition is also to be able to work if you join a fascist party. I give you an example because this is quite emblematic. He graduated in 1932, and in 1933-1934 he took part in the courses to teach in high schools. He took part in both the courses to teach mathematics and physics and the ones to teach history and philosophy. Naturally, as we have said before, it is inevitable and it is the result of the two courses, the one that is still a national competition, the one that has the best score for the national one, but he was not given any certificate because he lacks the registration of the fascist party. To give you an example, in 1935, a theoretical philosophy competition was sent, he and his dear friend Norberto Bobbio participated, but while Bobbio participated in the competition and the candidate won, the titles of the competition were sent back to the candidate, because there was a competition for ordinary classes, so only titles were sent without a convocation of candidates, the titles were sent back to the candidate, because there was a lack of registration of the fascist party. So, what does Germano do? In the meantime, he marries. He goes to teach at a private school, Giacomo Leopardi's private school, where he finds himself as a colleague of Pavesi, who taught Italian, and he, who taught physical mathematics. But this profession of teacher in a private school lasts until 1940, because in 1940 the fascist regime introduced a more restrictive norm, and even for those who teach in private schools the fascist party was dismissed.

1:20:00 It is not written as well as Pavel. Pavel draws himself into the languages that he translates wonderfully well, the series of works that you know, and even Germain draws himself into a town a little less famous, Barge, in the province of Cuneo, near the Valle Valdese, and he lives giving lessons of mathematics permanently, philosophy he told me that there was no great market, and translating some texts. This explains to me why, After the 8th of September 1943, between the 10th and the 11th of September, Jean Monat, together with a Sicilian jurist, Colagliani, founded and gave life to one of the very first partisan brigades. Jean Monat will participate in this period in the 20 months of the clandestine struggle of the Italian Liberation Movement. In the last months he will be moved from the mountains, He will be transferred to Turin and will participate as a tappist in the liberation of Turin. And here you can see that the strange things may come to an end. A few days after the National Insurrection, on April 25, 1945, the book of Simonin appears in the library. These are studies for a new nationalism. Now, today I want to limit myself only to a profile, so I do not go into the merits of all the interpretative problems that may arise on these topics. On these dates that I remember, it is certain that with this work Schumann tries to do an operation that, let's say, goes against what is the chiasma, emphasized by von Hayek, that still exists in our civilization. This chiasma tells us that very often the forces of the so-called civil progress are not based on an analogous position of progressivism in the field of knowledge, scientific, and that, on the other hand, the forces of social conservation, in general, However, they are only in favour of scientific development. Guillaume Moulin has an abnormal position with regard to this class because he tries to put together a progressive position in the field of science, philosophy, with a progressive position, or what he calls to be progressive, also in the field of science. This colloquium, published on April 25, 1945, and this desire to link the component of infusion on neopositivism with a declared civil empire, are the result of this fairly new path, which has recently come out to the attention of the world.

1:22:30 A student from Turin, Angelo Dorsi, on the Turin culture and this book, which is very important, has given life to many debates in Italy, which have also involved newspapers, is based on an analytical study of archive documents. It is a volume of more than 500 pages, very rich, and it is the point of approval of a research that lasted 10 years. Having looked carefully at all the documents published by Dorsi, he mentions many other antifascists, I quote only one more emblematic case, as we have already mentioned, by Norberto Bobbio, a great friend of Chez Monat. As you know, in the archives there are letters in which Bobbio declared his adherence to fascism and his closeness, and the same thing happened for Antonicelli and others. There has never been such a compromise with fascism. Geronimo is one of the few intellectuals who, since the youth of 1929, has been decidedly opposed to fascism. He also had the personal coherence to pay a price for his choice, which I think is quite clear to me. After 1945, Gémonin is commissioned by the Zorino Polytechnic to carry out a course on which he is left with a wide margin of freedom in organizing and thinking. He publishes a book that, according to my judgment given by Lolli in the profile of Gémonin Mathematician, is a jewel that is the history and philosophy of infinitesimal analysis, I apologize for the impudence that I present because I only have a photocopy. I photocopied it at the State Library in Milan, as you know it is subject to... It is a very precious book, and it tells us how the foundational problem, in its connection with the recent development of analysis, is perhaps at the center of this work that we can consider a jewel of analysis.

1:25:00 Here is a very interesting interpretative cut that however, we say, will no longer be used and will remain a bit unique in this work, in its production. If we ask ourselves, from the point of view of mathematics and hegemonics of the late 1940s and early 1950s, what is public, we find studies dedicated to abstract spaces and quite rigorous reflections on the axiomatic method. And so we can say that the second phase of the hegemonic mathematical thought is dedicated to this foundational problem with this reflection on the axiomatic method. However, these years are also years of, after this participation also involved in the struggle for the liberation of Italy, are years of return, indeed, in reality Pojima has never stopped on the front of the studio, but of extensive involvement in the publication of important works. I only mention some. The translation that appears in 48. A collection of studies by a logical mathematician, Frege, Aritmetica e Logica. This book deserves at least a mention in its history, because, to be honest, Gemona proposed the translation of this book in the second half of the 1930s. This introduction was blocked by two very clear professors, two mathematicians, a mathematician on one side and a philosopher, Carlin, on the other, who made memories and judged the publication of Frege in the second half of the 1930s, because this is the motivation that appears in their writing. Italian mathematics, with the contributions of Beharber, went far beyond the contributions given by Frege. In 1950, he translated an important work, the Binder, Introduction to Logical Positivism, and in 1951 his translation of The Principles of Mathematics by Bertrand Raas appears. So, you see, this is a translation work that is, if you will, also modest, but Very important for the Italian culture because it is used to put into circulation ideas, works, themes that were practically unknown. The case of Frege was confirmed. Frege, fascism, had prevented the translation of this type of Frege. But these are also the years in which Gemona published in 1953 a little book, which, however, is precious, which also had a certain international resonance, which was translated into Spanish and in this edition had an interesting circulation.

1:27:30 Dedicated to a rapid synthesis of scientific thought, and then published in 1956, perhaps his most beautiful book, from the point of view of freshness, of historical design, which is Galileo Galilei, a lucky book that was produced in 11 languages ​​in the congress we were talking about earlier, in 1985. In fact, this book represents a relationship of Popper and the relationship of Popper dedicated to Gémini was opened with the consideration of Gémini as a historian of science. In fact, abroad, Gémini is not known neither as a mathematician nor as a philosopher, but as a historian, thanks to this book. This book deserves a long speech, which I obviously cannot do, but I want to make it clear. The new idea is to show a Galileo who tries to make a battle within the Church to save his most important values. What are the most important values of Galileo? The defense of science, of course, and of the full cultural value, not only of science, but also of technique, if you are aware of the opening of speech. Mathematical speeches and demonstrations on the subject of new sciences, and, on the other hand, his faith, his sincere faith in the Catholic faith, that is, Galileo argued that he could be a good scientist and a good Catholic at the same time. To tell the truth, the Church gave him other reasons, three centuries later, with the revision of the Galileo process, but you know that the battle of Galileo went against a series of defeats. This is the innovative key with which Shemona reads the figure of Shemona, as a reformer almost from within the Church. In reality, if you asked me how Shemona came to this key, I would give you an answer related to his biography, because in reality in those years he had a huge problem, which brings us back to that key of Fonaglia that we mentioned earlier. Shemona, in fact, in those years, thanks to the civil experience of the war, The Italian Liberation Party is part of the Communist Party, but it does not share the ideology, the culture of the Communist Party. And I wonder how I can, within a party that was then a part of the Communist Party, It's really like a party not only totalitarian and Stalinist, but also like a form of a church, to fight for a change of this culture in which one was not. From this point of view, I can only give you in advance the document found this summer, interesting, because Germain writes in 1940 in the Italian Communist Party,

1:30:00 but he does not do it by asking for a specific theological dispense concerning his non-admission to cultural theses. In other words, he did not share the dialectical materialism defended by the Communist Party, because we have seen that they kept the theses of neopositivism closer to each other. In any case, this reflection of the 1950s has as a point of reference, on a philosophical level, a work by Felici, always published by Naudi, which is The Saints of Deo-Rationalist Philosophy. What is the difference between the studies for a new rationalism and these essays of neo-rationalist philosophy? The proof changes, and to understand this change of curvature of his work well, we need to present an eminently Turin environment, of which we have a brief flash. This is a photo of a congress held since December 1952. You see the foreground. This is Bobbio. In the second row, we see Prospero Nuvoli, who was an engineer, this is a mathematician, Eugenio Flora, and Ugo Rondelli. And behind, in the last row, Porto and Madonna Scosta. They are participating in a conference organized by the Center for Methodological Studies, founded by the initiative of Chemonat, with the contribution of these scholars, and in particular by Bagnano. The influence of Abagnano on the Hegemonic thought is interesting because Abagnano published some studies on the magazine of philosophy in which he tries to dedicate his predominantly existentialist formation with a re-reading of the philosophy of John Dewey. He proposes to interpret the scientific theories as an expression of the techniques of human rationality. Viovanha makes up this idea and the sages of neo-Zenian philosophy are born, where he gathers a series of studies, where he proposes to give life to a movement that will be the Italian neo-Luminist movement. Here too we do not have the time to remember the atmosphere, the horizon, but we can say some names.

1:32:30 It was a short season of neo-Luminism. Italian activism is a cultural movement that has as its cities of origin Turin, Milan. Ferenczi, in part, and he sees active characters like Bobbio, like Gémanin, like Mario D'Albrà, like Giulio Preti, like, and now we are not remembering them all, people who find themselves continuing a horizon of neo-illuminism, that is to say, a rationality that is no longer thought of with an R, but is thought of as a form of minor rationality. A form of first-hand, we could say, with Kant, which is also able to realize that reason learns from its mistakes. It learns from its mistakes and therefore has to deal with the historical dimension of science. But then there is a problem, because in reality, if you keep in mind the history and philosophy of infinitesimal analysis, if you keep in mind Galileo Verdi and if you keep in mind this opening to the neo-rationalistic dimension, Let's make a big move. In 1945, Gémonat publishes The Studies of New Rationalism. There is a very curious phrase in which this book opens. He says, the limits of the philosophy of Neopositivism are so evident, declares Gémonat, that they will not even be illustrated. Then the whole book, 400 pages, is largely a defense of the philosophy of Neopositivism. Curious. In Germain's edition, he adds that they are so evident for a person who has been educated in the Italian cultural sphere. But what are these so evident limits? I'm not going to tell you the path with which we can reach our conclusion, but we can say that the most evident limits are the claim of the positivist to grasp the essence of scientificity outside, above, beyond, independently of the historical dimension. Here you can see what is the fundamental purview of Gemonard's reflection, because it is not true, as Gemonard has said several times, that the thesis expressed in his first and second works was above all in his soul, when in fact Gemonard wrote, via Goethe, that science is all immersed in its historical dimension and cannot understand scientific material independently of the intrinsic historicity of this age.

1:35:00 Theoretically, they say something that has remained in the background, only that when Eugémona adheres to neopositivism, he is unable to put together his adhesion to neopositivism with his idea of background, and then what does he do? He doubts himself. On the one hand, there is the neo-positivist philosopher, who publishes the books we have just mentioned, and on the other, there is the historian of science, who publishes books on the history of science in Galileo and on the history of infinitesimal analysis and philosophy. But there is an unsanitary contrast. It will be the torment of Ludovico. A torment, however, never declared, because in the meantime, as is often the case with intellectuals, Scemonae cuts and sews a dress, the dress of the one who brought positivism to Italy. And with this habit it will come practically to death. So we have to make some reflections. Can we accept this habit as it has been accepted by many generations of philosophers of science in Italy? In my opinion, no. Because, as you understand, this habit is a paraphernalia. Because with this image, I am only the importer of positivism, I have only a neutral function. There were three days of debates in the 1985 conference to celebrate Gemonat, and then at the end he said the word Gemonat. He said it with an observation of great honesty, as the man was, as it has emerged from the few dates we have remembered, but very paradoxical, because he said in reality here you have done too much praise to my thought, this was true, except in Mallorca where no one had exposed critical observations on his intellectual reflection, I have not produced an autonomous theoretical thought. I am not comparable to a philosopher who was one of the first Italian philosophers in the 19th century, that is Giulio Preti, whom we have already remembered. Finally, I do not have my own philosophy. Then I would have a paradoxical figure, an epistemologist, which is now considered to be part of the philosophy of science in Italy, an epistemologist without epistemology, a real scapegoat. The paradox is that in reality this image is not acceptable on a historical and critical level because, for a reason we have already mentioned, I told you that when Germain wrote the studies for the New Rationalism, he looked at one soul of Neopositivism, at one way of reading Neopositivism, but Neopositivism has more souls. And why does it have more conventionalist, syntactic souls, you know? Why didn't he solve this dilemma? How can he take into account the flexibility of scientific categories within an epistemological reflection on the structure of scientific theory?

1:37:30 This is the problem of the 1960s. It is interesting to analyze how this problem is reflected in his attitude towards mathematical reflection. Because if we have seen that in the first public phase of the mini-theories, in the style of Alapéa, if in the second part, facing the foundational problems in historical terms, he discusses abstract spaces and deals with the problem of the axiomatic method, in the third phase, let's say from the 1960s to the 1970s, In the field of mathematics, what does he do? He does an operation of which the Italian culture should have been deeply impressed and this, as you know, there is no less widespread feeling of human gratitude, even in cultural terms. In fact, the Italian culture has been largely forgotten. But Jean Valin has a merit, a merit, that of spreading an analytical knowledge of mathematical logic. He did it in many ways, not only by forming around himself a group of scholars who soon became the most qualified mathematicians and logic scholars in Italy. Not only did he do it with a great intellectual openness, he was the only one who had been enrolled in the Communist Party and then he left in 1965. The CNR welcomes a religious Catholic education that comes from the Catholic Church in Milan, but from the Pontadini books. Not only does it do it by making an institutional battle, and those who know Italy know what the weight of this battle is, it tries to spread it throughout the universities, both in the scientific faculties and in the humanities, the presence of logical mathematics. We can immediately say that they have responded better to the faculties of philosophy, not because of them, but because of Ludovico, who had more influence. Not only does he do it with an editorial battle, he opens a column, he opens several columns, but one in particular is that of philosophy and science, at Feltrinelli, and he wants that the first two books, not by chance, but two books of mathematical logic, the translation of the Quai and the work of Ettore Casari, who was actually a student of Pretti, you can see that the names come back here, but still a scholar who was then formed, together with Corrado Mangione, largely under the influence of Gemola. But he also does it by establishing a group of CNRs, and he himself has been teaching logic for many years, since he was in charge of the University of Bavaria.

1:40:00 And, in short, we could say that this phase has a sound, a sound of recognition for his participation in the 8th Congress of the Italian Mathematical Union in 1964, where Germenal carries out an important and very beautiful lecture, which is quite happy, as Taro also says in his book on the subject of the lecture. We can say that this phrase opens the Italian culture, adds the Italian culture on the historical level, forms the new generations of scholars who, among other things, help him dialectically to follow these studies, this is evident from his bibliography, but above all he does it A battle is being waged by Italian mathematicians who invite him to the 8th congress, as I said, because he defends the full cultural value of mathematical reflection and this has been a merit for a long time. These are, however, also the years in which Gemona opens the door to what we have said, and so I will briefly say, because time flies, that in the 1960s she publishes a book, Philosophy and Philosophy of Science, in which she tries to go from a static analysis of scientific theory to a dynamic analysis, that is, to the tradition of historicism, and this will then take her to publish two works in the 1970s. Perhaps his most famous work is the History of Philosophical and Scientific Thought, published in seven volumes between 1970 and 1976, and in 1977, Science and Realism, which is a theoretical book, indeed, we can even say a great theoretical publication. What is the problem of Schumann? I think that Ludovico would have been happy to be with us today because it is largely the problem that we have heard to discuss and on which, I think, we could return to discuss the value of knowledge. This is a great technological achievement linked to conventionalism. But on the other hand, Schindler-Carilli wants to avoid both an agnostic solution, which reduces all theories, basically avoiding the cognitive content, and on the other hand, he also wants to reject a solution that transforms scientific knowledge into absolute knowledge.

1:42:30 With great intellectual strength and great commitment, from 1977 until his death, he published 16 volumes in 15 years and retired. In fact, he generally slowed down his activity. Instead, you see this constant research because he had a philosophical soul. These are not all things of the same value, of course, but they are things in which you feel these anxieties. He will do it by taking up, very curiously, precisely those theses of dialectical materialism that he had rejected in the 1940s. It is true that he tries to interpret them in a different way, it is true that the name in reality was very unhappy, it is true that if you read Science and Realism you will not be able to understand them. His position, whether realist or materialist, he tries to overlap two things. At a certain point, when he publishes the German edition, the second edition, with an important appendix of this volume, he says but in the end my materialist realism is associated with a form of realism in the common sense of Thomas Wright. So, in reality, Benjamin Ham, from this point of view, is not so much interested in the construction of this, at least in my opinion, it remains a criticism that can be moved to the construction of a philosophical system, as much as he remains interested in putting this problem with force. We must investigate and better recognize the nature, as I would have said, of scientific knowledge in its dimension of objectivity. Really, there was a deafness that came from all his cultural training and that, precisely on this problem of the objectivity of scientific knowledge, an author will always remain constantly out of the field of his reflection and it is Kant, that author who, with his transcendentalism, with his reflection on the plane of transcendentality, why has he always remained out, away from his reflection? He has always remained out because, as we say, in this As it has been supported by eminent interpreters, this is a photo from the 1960s taken in his studio, it has always been linked to the great tradition of positivism. He would be the last great positivist of the Italian culture, as the Italian culture of the great neo-idealists, such as Croce Gentile,

1:45:00 as a great Marxist in Labriola and Gaucho, so he would have had a great positivist in Giacomo Napoli. I do not fully adhere to this interpretative thesis, even if I recognize that it has good cards to play. In fact, this deafness derives from having read Kant in his youth thanks to the influence of Martinetti. I have read about the personal copies that Martinetti donated to Chabonat, the works of Kant. Martinetti wrote in particular the Prolegomeni of every metaphysical future of Kant, a beautiful edition. And if you go to find the structures and observations of the Shema, you will see that the young Shema reads Kant from an essentially ethical point of view. When he then comes into contact with neopositivism, Kant is the black beast. Kant is the obsolete by definition. In addition, he looks at the neopositivism as an animal that has no sensitivity to these problems. Let's not say when he confronts it with race. It seems to me then to have that concern about history, and even there Kant, for reasons of Kantian theory, seems to be a very distant author. In short, to make it short, the author who perhaps would have helped him more to dissolve this mental cramp that has been there for a century on the possibility of grasping the internal flexibility of scientific categories, and therefore opening what we can call the dialectic of objectivity, of knowledge, was not just that. So, how can Gemonac be defined conclusively? This is an image that is shown for the first time. Gemonac arrived in Paris, a city of origin, in 1985 when he gave a gift to a group of students who had organized five years of Parisian seminars of philosophy, to come to present the acts of our seminars, which were published in a volume. I think that the importance, the beauty of the Gemona lecture can be synthesized with the title that we wanted to give at the conference promoted by my department. At the Metrisio Academy of Architecture, which will be held on November 29th in Milan, the city of Greece of Gemona, we wanted to organize this conference in honor of Gemona, the passion of reason.

1:47:30 Gemona is a rationalist, but like all true rationalists, she is such because she has a great heart. Thank you. As far as the first narration is concerned, it can be said that in the conflict on the famous problem of protocols between Slick and Nogat, there is an opt-out for the solution of Nogat and what he does not share in the solution of Slick, which in reality was made by an old setting but still current, was this anxiety of certainty, of these findings that Slick had to throw like antennas to touch the real world. It is very curious to read the introduction that Germonat will make at the end of the 1970s to a collection of Schlinck's essays published by the Moulinot because the distance of many decades will bring Schlinck's figure closer to that of his realism. This is a reference to realism that has not specified a great decision. As for his relationship with Malburgo, we should go back to an analytical review that he did in some volumes of the Neocantian, his magazine of philosophy already in the 1930s, where it is seen how that limit of training worked.

1:50:00 These works have as a critical criterion the adherence to positivism. The positivism in the Kantian tradition was very distant. Except for Kronbach, who did not engage in this discussion, they seem to be quite delusional when Gemona says that in the end these authors are valid in the sense that they approach the thesis in positivism, but in this case they are not positivists, and in the other case they have been surpassed. Personally, I have discussed this school several times. I'm sorry if you can't see this, but I can't tell you with any success. Because I can't tell you with any success, but I can't tell you with any success. Because I can't tell you with any success, but I can't tell you with any success. Because I can't tell you with any success, but I can't tell you with any success. Because I can't tell you with any success, but I can't tell you with any success. Because I can't tell you with any success, but I can't tell you with any success. Because I can't tell you with any success, but I can't tell you with any success. Because I can't tell you with any success, but I can't tell you with any success. Because I can't tell you with any success, but I can't tell you with any success. Because I can't tell you with any success, but I can't tell you with any success. There is a lot of talk about physics and for many reasons, for me and for many of you, this is a very good thing because they are foundations, they are a very good approach, a very good way, that is, I really think that I am very open to this field of science, of scientific research. So, what you have presented as a problem is the fact that you have been influenced by the youth in a positive way and that is why you have always been involved in this strong relationship.

1:52:30 And then there is also history, which can be seen as a weakness for us, a great strength, because we have missed the positive aspects of history, if we want, both in October and often in the past, but also in the future. Geology seems to be very naive and unattractive, but then, in this terminology, developments such as the ones in common with H-14 etc. go in the direction of science, also in the discussion that has been made today with the social dimension of mathematics, science, and so on. There is also a certain sense in this whole historical dimension. My question is, I have not followed the position of an expert, but what was the position compared to, for example, these two groups that in the background were in a certain sense? No, let's talk about the history dimension. Maybe it's my fault. Without a doubt, this is one of his greatest merits. In fact, he wrote this work, which is a unique one at the international level, on the history of philosophical and scientific thought, intertwining them in this dimension of history. Without a doubt, he was recognized in this deep opening of the philosophy of science, in the history dimension. Among other things, the science of realism makes some punctual criticisms, to Lakatos, Kuhn, to the new philosophy of science of the 50s and 60s. And his criticism can also be shared because he refuses to elaborate a single scheme applicable to all situations. This is too good a historian to know that he can change history in an oven. In fact, his recovery from dialectics is the origin of this problem. The materialistic dialectic, as it is often said, is too generic.

1:55:00 In the face of this criticism, Germard explained that, in his opinion, it was a disadvantage for him to keep in mind the extreme complexity of the historical event. Nevertheless, on this level, there are some movements that have been shaped. Certainly, in the 60s and 70s, there is a cultural merit to be observed that without the historical dimension, a scientific knowledge, a scientific theory, a mathematical theory cannot be understood. On the other hand, this calls for dialectics, which is a huge problem, because dialectics has or does not have its own theological framework, its own triadic scheme. So, if we are going to read from this point of view, his statements are not very clear. Personally, I find myself more in some statements, always on the historical dimension, which are found, for example, in the works of 1953, in the essays of Neonationalist philosophy, when they say with great courage that the development of the human being is often a zigzag development. There are phases in which there is no recovery. There are dry losses. This is the problem at the bottom, because in reality the dialectic has this geological vizio at the bottom, where there is no dry loss. The negative is always recovered at the moment of a process towards the end. Unfortunately, we know that, as the concrete history tells us, there are many elements. I realize that making this statement already means making a choice, perhaps metaphysical, ontological. But it is certain that he looks more at history according to this horizon of the Illuminist ascension. In history there is evil, there are dry losses, and it is the duty of a rationalist to fight this evil. And in the event that evil is stronger than what it fights, he denounces it as evil. This is the position, but this position in the Illuminist comes... I don't say so much, but I create a problem. Now I don't want to get into the merits of this, which is a bit complex, but I point out an issue. I have stopped saying that Gimelani, in the 1950s, was also the author of school textbooks. If you take the first edition of this manual, for those who are classical scientists, but also for the master's studies, you will find at some point... In the third volume, in contemporary philosophy, there is a very strange paragraph written in minor body, as the student of the student of the student of the student of the student of the student of the student of the student of the student of the student of the student of the student of the student of the

1:57:30 The problem is that human rationality, which is based on scientific and mathematical theories, is a tool to understand the rationality of the real and therefore coincides with this reality. So rationality is in the ontological structures, so to speak, or is it a human tool built only to understand? We can say that Gémonin is a humanist who is looking for the second solution, rationality, a historically fallible and verifiable instrument built by man. Gémonin, from the 60s and 70s, makes up a formula of philosophy of identity. For example, he says that the development of history and science is a rational development in itself. Now, Gémonin himself, in his monograph on Danilo, shows how many elements, even rational, exist in the development of scientific thought. Science really advances, it is a human approach, so it has errors, it has lost itself, before they were called lost ideas in the field of mathematical theories. This was the merit of having opened up the historical dimension for knowledge, I think it is a great cultural merit. He thought he had found a synthesis in this. I just wanted to mention that perhaps this synthesis has more problems than he thought it would solve, especially because this dimension of the objectivity of scientific knowledge, he read it with the tools that came with this tradition, rationalism, positivism and materialist realism, not well defined for the truth. It remained the center of the neo-Kantian tradition.

2:02:30 There is also the subject of knowledge, which has its diameters, including history, because scientific knowledge... It is to know that we are dealing with things that exist, and it gave us the definition of practical realism, that is, realism is to admit that there is something independent of the mind, of the subject that studies, and we said no, this definition is unacceptable to us, because it is unacceptable to Kant's notion, not only this objection that you have remembered, I remember because it was made by me by others, But is he a materialist? If this is materialism, so is realism, so is Saint Thomas. By the way, Sebastian Timpanaro, in the third edition of his book on materialism, takes up this whole observation, just by discussing with Schumann. And it is he who, for example, has also developed this thesis, this theology of the presence of materialism. But, in short, what Jean Monard wanted to emphasize was that science is knowledge that is another reality. And then, in reality, it can be said that he is a materialist, and perhaps the most clear definition of his materialism can be found in the last chapter of the sixth volume of the History of Scientific-Philosophical Thought, which I refer to as the first edition.

2:05:00 Because when he delineates the elements for the new conception of the world, he defines his materialism in this way. The new essentiality of man, of the human being, of the historical character of all the cultural product of man, and thirdly, the primitive character of our knowledge, relative truth. This is the first problem, because in Latin, what does it mean? I remember an event organized in Paris by Joël and Professor Petitot with Gérôme Bonnard and Agathe. This is a great discussion on this notion of relative truth. Jean Morin did not make the same position of a Neocantian as Preeti. Preeti said that truth is human because everything that is human is born with man and will disappear with man. So it makes no sense to talk about truth that has a stronger ontological foundation than dimension. But this was not the case, and so he tried to say that it was a subjective reality, but historically flexible. And then, how does this genealogy emerge? By compiling a category that came from Duhem, the category of capital, of heritage, of scientific technical knowledge. How to regulate the relations between theory and internal heritage? Through dialectics. Of course, these terms required further explanation. I think that even if he played with his choice of this atomic and other realism, materialism, he also, as he has always played, with all the intellectual biography of Egebonin, a civil attention. He also wanted to be critical of the role of the intellectual. Egebonin, we could really say, is an intellectual who has always inhabited the pitiful land of Noftu, his biography from 1929 until the end. I remember, if I can spare a minute, an interview that was made to the Corriere della Sera on the occasion of the invasion of Afghanistan from Russia. The journalist said that it was a good and just thing for Russia to occupy Afghanistan, because it is the enemy of the Middle East and it is necessary to fight the Middle East.

2:07:30 Publishing an interview requires a journalist to have a Stalinist, dogmatic, favoring thread. A few days ago, I was talking to a colleague, and I happened to read a piece by this journalist, almost 10 years old, a little over 13 years old, in which he said that it was right to talk about Afghanistan because it was the Middle Ages and it was right to do it. There are other interventions, I thank the speakers, you the participants, I would also like to thank six people without whom this event would have been virtual or material, who are Denise Andrea, Alberto Vanglini, Michela Simona, Diego Noia, Paolo Giordano and Pertina Moretti. Thank you very much.