Skip to main content
Log in

A Modern Cynic’s Parrhêsia and Enlightened False Consciousness in Diderot’s Philosophical Dialogue Rameau’s Nephew

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Fudan Journal of the Humanities and Social Sciences Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In his final lectures, Michel Foucault highlighted Diderot’s Rameau’s Nephew as pivotal in the history of the transmission and metamorphosis of Cynicism (Foucault 2012, 191). This article investigates and repudiates Foucault’s conception of the evolution of ancient Cynicism in Diderot’s Rameau’s Nephew during the Enlightenment, focusing on parrhêsia, free speech, or outspokenness. It examines how Diogenes of Sinope’s ethos of truth-telling deviates from its original sense and degenerates into mockery among the Enlightenment cynics in the shift of discourse from the agora to the public spheres like the Café de Régence. Rameau’s nephew epitomizes modern cynicism, embodying various facets such as satire, misanthropy, and a disdain for societal norms. He challenges sacred values such as truth and truthfulness with sarcasm or indifference in the public sphere of the Enlightenment. Though aspiring to practice parrhêsia, the nephew’s speech deconstructs morality, while his actions seem puppet-like. He oscillates between animality and a “second nature” shaped by rationality. Modern cynics, such as the nephew, contend that all public opinions that dictates decisions are often driven by self-interest. They lack autonomy, resorting to farce or sarcasm when thwarted. In essence, the modern cynicism in the Enlightenment shows great discrepancies from the parrhêsiastic classical Cynicism and leads to a complex interplay of freedom of speech, societal critique, and individualism. Modern cynicism, born from the Enlightenment’s failures, embodies an “enlightened false consciousness.” It culminates in a modern cynical worldview shaped by societal disillusionment and the failure of the Enlightenment ideals.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Explore related subjects

Discover the latest articles and news from researchers in related subjects, suggested using machine learning.

Data availability

Not applicable.

Notes

  1. About the incompatibility between parrēsia and democracy, see Foucault (2012).

  2. About Pierre Bayle and Hegel’s criticism concerning the transmission and reception of Diogenes Laertius’s cynics, see Niehues-Pröbsting (1996).

References

  • Aristotle. 1995. Constitution of Athens (Trans. F.G. Kenyon) in the complete works of aristotle: volume 2 (Ed. Jonathan Barnes). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

  • Audidière, Sophie. 2006. Diderot philosophe. Recherches sur Diderot et sur l’Encyclopédie, mis en ligne le 28 novembre 2006. URL: http://rde.revues.org/265. Consulté le 19 mai 2016.

  • Bejan, T.M. 2019. Two concepts of freedom (of speech). Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society 163 (2): 95–107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bell, Daniel. 1990. Resolving the contradictions of modernity and modernism. Society 27.3: 43–50.

  • Bewes, Timothy. 1997. Cynicism and postmodernity. New York: Verso.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cox, Jeffrey. 1986. The parasite and the puppet: diderot’s neveu and kleist’s marionettentheater. Comparative Literature 38 (3): 256–269.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cutler, Ian. 2005. Cynicism from diogenes to dilbert. London: McFarland & Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • D’Alembert, Jean le Rond. 1753. Essai sur la société des gens de lettres et des grands. Paris: A. Belin.

  • Dallmayr, F. 2003. Cosmopolitanism: moral and political. Political Theory 31 (3): 421–442.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Desmond, William. 2014. Cynics. London: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Diderot, Denis. 1751. Encyclopédie, ou Dictionaire raisonné des sciences, des arts, et des métiers pars une société de gens de lettres. Online version: http://portail.atilf.fr/encyclopedie/

  • Diderot, Denis. 2006. Rameau’s Nephew and First Satire (trans. Margaret Mauldon and Nicholas Cronk). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  • Dockstader, Jason. 2021. Cynic cosmopolitanism. European Journal of Political Theory 20 (2): 272–289.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dupré, Louis. 2008. The enlightenment and the intellectual foundations af modern culture. New Haven: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foucault, Michel. 1983. Discourse and truth: the problematization of parrhesia (six lectures given by Michel Foucault at Berkeley, Oct-Nov. 1983). foucault.info/downloads/discourseandtruth.doc

  • Foucault, Michel. 2012. The courage of truth: the government of self and others II; Lectures at the Collège de France, 1983—1984. Vol. 8 (trans. Arnold I. Davidson, and Graham Burchell). New York: Macmillan.

  • Foucault, Michel. 2020. Discourse and truth” and “parrhêsia. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gehrke, P.J. 2013. On the many senses of “parrēsia” and rhetoric. Rhetoric Society Quarterly 43 (4): 355–361.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gordon, J. 1997. John stuart mill and the “marketplace of ideas.” Social Theory and Practice 23 (2): 235–249.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gosepath, Stefan. 2011. Equality. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2011 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = <http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2011/entries/equality/>.

  • Gumbrecht, Hans Ulrich. 2021. Prose of the world: denis diderot and the periphery of enlightenment. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Habermas, Jürgen. 1974. The public sphere: an encyclopedia article (1964) (trans. Sara Lennox and Frank Lennox.) New German Critique 3: 49–55.

  • Habermas, Jürgen. 1991. The structural transformation of the public sphere: an inquiry into a category of bourgeois society. Boston: MIT press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hegel, G. W. F. 1977. Hegel’s Phenomenology of Spirit (Trans. A. V. Miller). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  • Howard, Jeffrey W. Spring 2024. Freedom of speech. The stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. Edward N. Zalta & Uri Nodelman (eds.), URL = <https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2024/entries/freedom-speech/>.

  • Horkheimer, Max and Theodor W. Adorno. 2002. Dialectic of enlightenment (trans. Gunzelin Noeri). Stanford: Stanford University Press.

  • Isocrates.1980. Areopagiticus. In Isocrates II. Trans. G. Norlin. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1980.

  • Jauss, Hans Robert. 1989. The dialogical and the dialectical Neveu de Rameau; or, the reciprocity between diderot and socrates, Hegel and Diderot in Question and Answer: Forms of dialogic understanding (trans. Michael Hays). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press,118–47.

  • Kant, Immanuel. 1979. The conflict of the faculties (Trans. M. J. Gregor). Lincoln and London: University of Nebraska Press.

  • Kennedy, Kristen. 1999. Cynic rhetoric: the ethics and tactics of resistance. Rhetoric Review 18 (1): 26–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kleingeld, Pauline and Eric Brown.2019. Cosmopolitanism. The stanford encyclopedia of philosophy (Winter 2019 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = <https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2019/entries/cosmopolitanism/>.

  • Konstan, David. 2012. The two faces of parrhêsia: free speech and self-expression in ancient greece. Antichthon 46: 1–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laertius, Diogenes. 1925. Lives of eminent philosophers, Volume II: Books 6–10 (Trans. R. D. Hicks). Loeb Classical Library 185. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

  • Laursen, John Christian. 2009. Cynicism Then and Now. Iris: European Journal of Philosophy & Public Debate 1.2: 469–482.

  • Liddell, Henry George and Robert Scott. 1940. A Greek-English Lexicon (revised and augmented throughout by Sir Henry Stuart Jones. With the assistance of. Roderick McKenzie). Oxford: Clarendon Press.

  • MacKenzie, Scott. 1994. Mad priests and the mimetic faculty: ethnographic film, post-colonialism, and the (new) world order. Cineaction 33: 12–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mazella, David. 2007. The making of modern cynicism. Virginia: University of Virginia Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mill, John. 2003. On liberty. New Haven: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Momigliano, Arnaldo. 1973. Freedom of speech in antiquity. Dictionary of the History of Ideas, Vol. II. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons: 252–263.

  • Moles, John L. 2000. Cynic cosmopolitanism. In the cynics. The cynic movement in antiquity and its legacy. Ed. Hans-Jürgen Horn, R. Bracht Branham, and M-O. Goulet-Cazé. California: University of California Press.

  • Niehues-Pröbsting, Heinrich.1996. The modern reception of cynicism: diogenes in the enlightenment. hellenistic culture and society: 329–365.

  • Porter, James I. 2023. The cynics with and without foucault. Arethusa 56 (3): 363–389.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prozorov, Sergei. 2017. Foucault’s affirmative biopolitics: cynic parrhesia and the biopower of the powerless. Political Theory 45 (6): 801–823.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pujol, Stéphane. 1993. L’Espace public du Neveu de Rameau. Revue D’histoire Littéraire De La France 5: 669–684.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roelens, Maurice. 1972. Le dialogue philosophique, genre impossible? L’Opinion des siècles classiques. Cahiers De L’association Internationale Des Études Françaises 24 (1): 43–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saxonhouse, Arlene. 2005. Free speech and democracy in ancient athens. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Scanlon, Thomas. 1972. A theory of freedom of expression. Philosophy & Public Affairs 1 (2): 204–226.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schindler, Sebastian. 2024. Post-truth politics and neoliberal competition: the social sources of dogmatic cynicism. International Theory 16 (1): 102–121.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt, James. 1996. The fool’s truth: diderot, goethe, and hegel. Journal of the History of Ideas 57 (4): 625–644.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scrivener, Michael. 2015. The cosmopolitan ideal in the age of revolution and reaction, 1776–1832. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shea, Louisa. 2010. The cynic enlightenment: diogenes in the salon. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sloterdijk, Peter. 1983. Kritik der Zynischen Vernunft. Berlin: Suhrkamp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sloterdijk, Peter, Michael Eldred, and Leslie A. Adelson. 1984. Cynicism: the twilight of false consciousness. New German Critique 33: 190–206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Small, Helen. 2020. The function of cynicism at the present time. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Sorial, Sarah. 2010. Free speech, autonomy, and the marketplace of ideas. The Journal of Value Inquiry 44 (2): 167–183.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stanley, Sharon. 2007. Retreat from politics: the cynic in modern times. Polity 39 (3): 384–407.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stanley, Sharon. 2012. The french enlightenment and the emergence of modern cynicism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Stone, A., and F. Schauer, eds. 2021. The oxford handbook of freedom of speech. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vice, Samantha. 2011. Cynicism and morality. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 14: 169–184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • von Held, Phoebe. 2007. Mad mimetics: alienation and theatricality in the figure of the neveu de rameau. Diderot Studies 30: 275–294.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walzer, A.E. 2013. Parrēsia, foucault, and the classical rhetorical tradition. Rhetoric Society Quarterly 43 (1): 1–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yoos, George. 1985. The rhetoric of cynicism. Rhetoric Review 4 (1): 54–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

First of all, I am deeply indebted to the two anonymous reviewers, whose insightful and constructive suggestions have significantly improved this article. Additionally, I would like to express my sincere gratitude to Christian Wildberg for his seminar on ancient Cynicism and its modern heritage at Princeton University, which helped me delve deeply into this eccentric school of ancient philosophy. I also appreciate the long-term support provided by the Classics Department, the Classical Philosophy Program, the Postclassicisms Global Initiative, and the Seeger Center at Princeton University in my studies of classics and classical receptions. Last but not least, I would like to extend my gratitude to the Associate Editor-in-Chief, Professor Lin Xi, for his meticulous editorial assistance and helpful advice, as well as to the editor Li Bai for her valuable suggestions.

Funding

This research project is supported by Tsinghua University Initiative Scientific Research Program and the Cyrus Tang Foundation.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jiani Fan.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.

Code Availability

No code was utilized in this study.

Author contribution

The author confrms sole responsibility for the study conception, analysis and interpretation of results, and manuscript preparation.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Fan, J. A Modern Cynic’s Parrhêsia and Enlightened False Consciousness in Diderot’s Philosophical Dialogue Rameau’s Nephew. Fudan J. Hum. Soc. Sci. (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40647-024-00433-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40647-024-00433-0

Keywords