The everyday is that element of our material and social environment that comes closest to us, and is thus the least visible; for it stands to reason that it will neither attract attention to itself, nor catch the eye.

It is often taken for granted that people who are predominantly unlettered inevitably have a low cultural level. The frequently used word “illiterate” does not merely signify inability to read and write but also implies a general lack of knowledge and culture. Indeed, some of the standard dictionaries mention “ignorant” as one of the meanings of the word illiterate. It is common for people belonging to modern industrial societies to look down upon the unlettered folk as uncivilized and incapable of finer intellectual and aesthetic sensibilities.

In the final pages of Chapter V of Afro-Brazilian Religions Roger Bastide sees, at a given moment in the socio-religious evolution of Brazil, a process of social disorganization which in its extent affects not only blacks but also poor white nationals and stranded immigrants.* As generator of a “ social marginalization,” this process could only be the passage through “a moment of transition” characterized by “the exaggerated speed of change in the country.” According to Bastide, an “organic period” follows: with the “proletarization of the blacks, the assimilation of the immigrants, the general rise in the standard of living of the masses, other phenomena of cultural and social reintegration will appear.” On the religious level the “spiritism of umbanda“ is the expression of this new phase.

The term is heavy, I admit, but I am adopting it provisionally on the grounds of a double affiliation.* On the one hand it refers to the sign-board (enseigne), a panel bearing an inscription traditionally announcing an artisan's trade; on the other hand, I relate it to the recently gallicized term “enginry” (ingénierie), which evokes, beyond the activity of the engineer, the ensemble of appliances and mechanisms made use of by industrial society, and at the origins of which one discovers the term engine (engin) in its double etymological acceptance as tool, instrument, and also as ruse or wile. By signery, a term which I put forward provisionally, I thus designate the ensemble of signs, signals, inscriptions, and visual stimuli manifested in our modern cities.

There is an obscure passage in a letter from Keats to Benjamin Bailey, written in 1817, which says:

This does not seem to make much sense. Nor does it help much to find an echo of that passage in the famous last lines of the Ode on a Grecian Urn, written two years later:

It goes without saying that my intention is not to remind the reader that poetry exists. Everyone knows it. Instead, I propose to show that it is possible, from which it follows that it is. inevitable and that, being inevitable, it is justified. It is not. enough that a thing exist for it to be legitimate: it could be merely apparent, accidental or insignificant; it. could conceal some trick or have only a temporary justification. Even more, the same word—here, poetry—could have successively designated different activities which in the end had no important relationship with each other.

It was a tenacious dream: the first language spoken by man was music, poetry and science, all at the same time. In the beginning the same word, given by God or dictated by Nature, stood for things, feelings and laws. And in the cherished image of this dawning faculty not only had the distinction between word and song, the difference between expressive power and objective designational power (or “referential function,” as the linguists say) not yet appeared, but the sacred and profane uses of speech had not yet established their separate kingdoms: in the great festival of the earliest days each word was a celebrant and contained the substance of reality. The word, invested with an integral meaning, hit the mark and rejoiced at the contact. Everything to which man gave a name was a god to him or the delegate of a god, so that by virtue of a benevolent revelation or of an exact inspiration the earliest vocal expression combined the fullness of knowing with the musical fullness of its expressive power. But this language of Paradise, witness to an age when man was not separated from man or removed from Nature or from God, has long been forgotten, dismembered, dispersed. Multiple and incompatible idioms have taken its place. The clear light of meaning has become clouded.

This article tries to provide elements of discussion and reflection rather than answers to the following question: for many centuries or even millennia, man, at least in so far as prehistory and history have recorded it, made a close connection between the beautiful, the true and the useful and he sought an aesthetic response in the minute manifestations of his daily existence as well as of his intellectual life. Today, and even more so for just the past fifty or one hundred years, art seems to be relegated to specific domains, expelled from the daily life of the average person. Yesterday, and for centuries and millennia, mankind was not satisfied with the fact that a house, a temple, a church, a fortification or a castle were lodgings, proper places to hold reunions, strong-holds built for a particular purpose, it was equally important that they be beautiful; a key did not only have to open a lock, a carriage had not only to run, a bit to control a horse, spurs to reassure the rider, a glass pane to close a window, a table to have a place setting, a chest of drawers to contain clothes, clothes to cover the body, a pen to write, a manuscript to transmit the signs of the alphabet—no, it was also necessary that these signs, that manuscript, the pen, the spurs, the bit, the key … be designed and decorated in such a way so as to evoke in the persons who merely saw them, without even using them, an affective emotion of beauty. Nor was it enough that science or a technique be true or useful, they had also to be beautiful.

The attention of scientists is now being drawn to a new branch of knowledge known as the “philosophy of science.” It is true, however, that philosophers of this country are not very happy about this word combination and often identify it with logical, positivism. Indeed, it would seem better to speak not of the philosophy, but of the logic of scientific development. Science has become an object of study, and there has emerged metascience, i.e., a science studying the logic of scientific structures. This field of knowledge cannot so far boast of generally accepted results. But it has done something else: new acute questions have been formulated and discussed fruitfully and originally. With this paper we are making an attempt to enter the discussion. The philosophy of science has not certainly taught scientists to discover the truth but it has indubitably increased their criticism towards their own activities, and this is really a very important accomplishment.

A lone fish swims haphazardly in any direction, but. if we get enough fish of the same species together so that neighboring individual fish may exchange signals, they adopt a common direction. Here we have a phenomenon of cooperation: many individuals find themselves in strong interaction with each other, and overall behavior is noticeably affected.

Parallel to the New Left, whose influence on French public opinion is so pronounced today, a new academic movement has grown up in the United States in the last fifteen years. Its ideas are the portents of an intellectual and scientific revolution whose importance for the economic and political future of western society should be almost as great as the Keynesian revolution of the ‘30s.