Michel Onfray La Contrehistoire De La Philosophie Audio 16 Full Best «HOT ✯»

La Contre-histoire de la philosophie

Michel Onfray’s , particularly Volume 16, represents a pivotal and controversial chapter in his career-long project to dismantle the traditional, "Platonized" history of Western thought. While the broader series aims to rehabilitate forgotten hedonist and materialist thinkers, Volume 16—titled Freud (2) —focuses specifically on a radical critique of Sigmund Freud and the foundations of psychoanalysis. The Project of Counter-History

  1. Oral Rhythm: Onfray’s sentences are crafted for the ear. His rhetorical pauses, crescendos, and occasional sarcastic asides are lost in the edited transcripts.
  2. Raw Passion: Unlike polished audiobooks, these are live university lectures. You hear the ambient silence of the room, the occasional cough, and Onfray’s unfiltered energy as he dismantles a Platonic dogma.
  3. Accessibility: The audio format transforms dense philosophy into a driving, almost musical narrative. Many listeners report finishing a 2-hour lecture on their commute as easily as a podcast.

It is a 13-CD audio box set (often referred to as "full" or "complete" sets) comprising lectures given at the Université Populaire de Caen Frémeaux & Associés La Contre-histoire de la philosophie Michel Onfray’s ,

  1. Demystify: He strips away the literary prestige of authors like Bernanos to reveal the political theocracy underneath.
  2. Connect: He links these 20th-century thinkers to the medieval scholastics and early Church Fathers profiled in earlier volumes, showing the continuity of the "slave morality" he critiques.
  3. Attack: Onfray challenges the epistemological validity of their claims, arguing that their rejection of reason and science is dangerous, yet intellectually consistent with their religious premises.

0‑15

| Segment (min) | Main Focus | Key Themes & Arguments | |---------------|------------|------------------------| | | Introduction & Methodology | Onfray restates his “counter‑historical” method: déconstruction of canonical narratives, emphasis on philosophie du quotidien (everyday philosophy), and the rejection of the “great‑man” model. | | 15‑45 | Pre‑Socratic Re‑Reading | Re‑evaluates Thales, Anaximander, Heraclitus, and Parmenides, positioning them as early materialists and proto‑political thinkers rather than abstract metaphysicians. | | 45‑75 | Socratic & Platonic Critique | Argues that Socrates is mythologized as a moralist; Plato’s Forms are presented as a political tool for elite control. Onfray highlights the Eleatic influences and the Socratic paradox of “knowing nothing.” | | 75‑105 | Aristotle & the Birth of Systematic Thought | Aristotle is portrayed as a pragmatic philosopher whose ethics stem from telos (purpose) rooted in social practice, not from transcendent virtues. Onfray disputes the view of Aristotle as the “father of logic.” | | 105‑130 | Hellenistic Schools (Stoicism, Epicureanism, Skepticism) | Stoics are reframed as early political activists resisting imperial domination; Epicureans as radical materialists who demystify pleasure; Skeptics as proto‑post‑structuralists questioning epistemic certainty. | | 130‑155 | Christian Philosophy & Augustine | Augustine’s Confessions are examined as a personal narrative that masks a broader political agenda of the early Church. Onfray links Augustine’s ideas to later scholasticism and the legitimation of religious authority. | | 155‑185 | Medieval Scholasticism & Thomas Aquinas | Aquinas is presented as a synthesizer who reconciles Aristotelian naturalism with Christian doctrine, thereby cementing a dual‑world ontology that persists in Western thought. | | 185‑210 | Renaissance Humanism & Machiavelli | Machiavelli’s Prince is defended as a realist treatise on power, not a cynical manual. Onfray emphasizes the continuity between Machiavellian politics and modern liberal democracy. | | 210‑235 | Early Modern Rationalism & Descartes | Descartes is critiqued for his methodological solipsism and for establishing a Cartesian dualism that underpins the modern subject‑object split. | | 235‑260 | Enlightenment & the Birth of Modernity | Focuses on Voltaire, Rousseau, and Kant, arguing that the Enlightenment’s claim to universal reason is a political project aimed at reshaping social hierarchies. | | 260‑285 | Conclusion & Forward‑Look | Onfray summarises the “counter‑history” as an invitation to re‑appropriate philosophy for contemporary emancipatory politics, stressing the need for a philosophy of the body and ethical hedonism . | Oral Rhythm: Onfray’s sentences are crafted for the ear