Representation, reflection, and self-esteem in the amour pur debate

Abstract

ABSTRACT This paper focuses on the late seventeenth-century discourse on “pure” or “disinterested love” (amour pur, amour désintéressé). The central claim is that the mystical writers’ critique against amour-propre threatens the system of esteem so that late seventeenth- and early eighteenth-century debates around pure love (the so called “amour pur debate” or the “Quietist affair”) cannot be accounted for simply in terms of mysticism; rather, they have a profound impact on the concept of social esteem. The middle term used to link these two aspects (the theological claims and the social questions) is a special theory of cognition defended by the proponents of pure love and strongly opposed by their opponents. The latter argue that the exclusion of self-reflectivity from disinterested love is a dangerous illusion which leads to negative social consequences. Thus, generally speaking, the Quietist affair is linked not only to the history of early modern self and spirituality but also to the forming of modern social values.