Podcasts about colloque

Notre époque ressemble à une mer sur laquelle il faut, contraint ou forcé, bien naviguer. Alors pour comprendre tous les ressacs de l'histoire, éviter les vagues scélérates et aller en profondeur dans les eaux troubles de la politique française et européenne, mieux vaut s'embarquer avec un capitaine au long cours. Cela tombe à pic car Jean-Yves Le Gallou vient de faire paraître ses Mémoires identitaires : 1968-2025 – Les dessous du Grand Basculement, aux éditions Via Romana. Aux côtés du politologue Jean-Yves Camus, journaliste et chercheur français spécialiste des mouvements nationalistes et identitaires en Europe, nous analyserons la montée des eaux depuis 1968. Que reste-t-il de l'idéologie soixante-huitarde et de ses hérauts recyclés dans le néoconservatisme ? Quelles idées, quels mots, quelles représentations se sont imposés pour orienter le cours de l'histoire ? Quelles écoles théoriques et idéologiques ont su résister au prêt à penser ? Autant de questions qu'il est nécessaire de poser sans oublier de remonter à la surface pour étudier les bancs de poissons conformistes de la politique et les grands prédateurs qui ont su s'imposer au cours des cinquante dernières années… Une plongée en eaux troubles en espérant que nos deux invités apportent un peu de clarté sur le paysage politique et idéologique de ces cinquante dernières années et les perspectives qui s'offrent à la France et à l'Europe plus que jamais à un tournant de leur histoire. Pour aborder ce sujet, nous recevons : - Jean-Yves Camus, politologue, dirige depuis 2014 l'Observatoire des radicalités politiques à la Fondation Jean-Jaurès. Chercheur associé à l'IRIS, il est également essayiste et collaborateur régulier de médias comme Charlie Hebdo et Le Monde diplomatique. - Jean-Yves Le Gallou, essayiste, haut fonctionnaire et homme politique français, a été membre du GRECE et cofondateur du Club de l'Horloge. Passé successivement par l'UDF, le FN puis le MNR, il a mené un parcours politique dense au cours duquel il a formulé et popularisé le concept de préférence nationale. Créateur du think tank Polémia, il a également cofondé en 2014 l'Institut Iliade. Vous pourrez retrouver les chroniques des auditeurs de l'Iliade : - "Perspectives identitaires" de Raphaël Ayma, auditeur de la promotion Frédéric Mistral de l'Institut Iliade. - Autour d'un vers, le rendez-vous poétique de Frédérique de Saint-Quio, auditrice de la promotion Homère. - Les chroniques musicales de Pierre Leprince, auditeur de la promotion Patrick Pearse de l'Iliade. - La boussole artistique de Gabrielle Fouquet, auditrice de la promotion Homère.Hébergé par Ausha. Visitez ausha.co/politique-de-confidentialite pour plus d'informations.

L'ethno-différentialisme célèbre les différences culturelles et ethniques comme une richesse à préserver. C'est le socle d'une vision du monde pluraliste fondée sur le droit des peuples à disposer d'eux-mêmes. C'est la préservation de notre ethnos. Découvrez la chronique de Romain Petitjean pour Ligne Droite, la matinale de Radio Courtoisie.Hébergé par Ausha. Visitez ausha.co/politique-de-confidentialite pour plus d'informations.

Le PMSD célèbre les 95 ans de Sir Gaëtan Duval : dépôt de gerbes, messe et colloque pour honorer son héritage politique by TOPFM MAURITIUS

La question de l'identité est aujourd'hui l'une des plus sensibles, entre signification qui s'effrite et replis identitaires. Que peuvent en dire les chrétiens ? Ont-ils un apport dans cette question ? Dans le même temps, peut-on parler d'une identité chrétienne ? C'est autour de ces points cruciaux pour aujourd'hui que s'organisent deux grands événements, fruits d'un séminaire de recherche : une soirée-débat et un colloque, les 16 et 17 octobre 2025. Anne-Cathy Graber et Michel Fédou, co-titulaires de la chaire de théologie oecuménique, nous en présentent les enjeux. infos et inscriptions à la soirée débat du jeudi 16 octobre 2025 : https://www.loyolaparis.fr/agenda/les-identites-en-question-enjeux-pour-lexistence-humaine-et-la-vie-des-eglises/ Infos et inscriptions au colloque du vendredi 17 octobre 2025 : https://www.loyolaparis.fr/agenda/les-identites-en-question-enjeux-pour-lexistence-humaine-et-la-vie-des-eglises-2/ Interview menée par Isabelle de La Garanderie, doctorante en théologie aux Facultés Loyola ParisEnregistrement et montage : Cyprien Rigolot.  Musique : Improvisations au piano de Pascal Marsault  Hébergé par Ausha. Visitez ausha.co/politique-de-confidentialite pour plus d'informations.

Dans son Libre Journal du 4 octobre 2025, Pascal Lassalle recevait Pierluigi Locchi, spécialiste de la communication institutionnelle, formateur, traducteur et président de l'Instituto Eneide, ainsi que Duarte Branquinho, essayiste, fondateur du mouvement identitaire portugais Terra e Povo et ancien directeur du journal O Diabo. L'émission avait pour thème : « Heidegger vu par Giorgio Locchi, la troisième grande figure de la tendance surhumaniste, porteur d'une nouvelle conception de l'histoire. »Hébergé par Ausha. Visitez ausha.co/politique-de-confidentialite pour plus d'informations.

Stanislas DehaeneChaire Psychologie cognitive expérimentaleAnnée 2025-2026Collège de FranceColloque : Seeing the Mind, Educating the BrainTheme: Space, Time, and NumberHow Humans Compress Information in Memory: The Language of Thought Hypothesis Colloque - Fosca Al Roumi : How Humans Compress Information in Memory: The Language of Thought Hypothesis Fosca Al Roumi

Stanislas DehaeneChaire Psychologie cognitive expérimentaleAnnée 2025-2026Collège de FranceColloque : Seeing the Mind, Educating the BrainTheme: Space, Time, and NumberNetwork Coding in Grid Cells and Place Cells: From Space to MemoryColloque - Edvard Moser : Network Coding in Grid Cells and Place Cells: From Space to MemoryEdvard Moser

Stanislas DehaeneChaire Psychologie cognitive expérimentaleAnnée 2025-2026Collège de FranceColloque : Seeing the Mind, Educating the BrainTheme: Space, Time, and NumberSpace as the Fabric of ThoughtColloque - Manuela Piazza : Space as the Fabric of ThoughtManuela Piazza

Stanislas DehaeneChaire Psychologie cognitive expérimentaleAnnée 2025-2026Collège de FranceColloque : Seeing the Mind, Educating the BrainTheme: Space, Time, and NumberThe Perception and Understanding of Patterns and GraphicsColloque - Lorenzo Ciccione : The Perception and Understanding of Patterns and GraphicsLorenzo CiccioneRésuméGraphics are a cultural product, meaning that they are a human invention with defined rules and syntax. In this respect, they are very similar to written words and numbers, probably the two most famous cultural inventions. However, unlike them, graphics have been invented much more recently and they became widespread only in the last two centuries. Furthermore, graphicacy—the ability to read and understand graphics—has received little attention from cognitive psychology. In this talk, I will present some findings about the human ability to intuitively extract statistics and mathematical relations from graphical representations. Specifically, I will show that: graphics' intuitions are available early on in development, independently from formal education, and correlate with statistical and mathematical knowledge; judging the trends of noisy graphical displays recycles brain areas usually devoted to the detection of objects' orientation (in agreement with the neuronal recycling hypothesis) and also activates the brain network for mathematics; both children and adults can extrapolate non-linear mathematical patterns, with the notable exception of quadratic and exponential functions.

Stanislas DehaeneChaire Psychologie cognitive expérimentaleAnnée 2025-2026Collège de FranceColloque : Seeing the Mind, Educating the BrainTheme: Neural Codes in Monkeys and HumansSingle-Neuron Correlates of Perception and Memory in the Human Medial Temporal LobeColloque - Florian Mormann : Single-Neuron Correlates of Perception and Memory in the Human Medial Temporal LobeFlorian Mormann

Stanislas DehaeneChaire Psychologie cognitive expérimentaleAnnée 2025-2026Collège de FranceColloque : Seeing the Mind, Educating the BrainTheme: Neural Codes in Monkeys and HumansDo Monkeys See the Way We Do?Colloque - Arun SP : Do Monkeys See the Way We Do?Arun SPRésuméMonkeys are widely used as model organisms for vision and cognition. While their anatomy and physiology have strong correspondences with humans, it is unclear whether they truly see the way we do. In most studies, monkeys are extensively trained on specific tasks, leaving us without a more general answer to this question, along with the nagging doubt that the extensive training might have altered their perception. So how do we then test whether monkeys see the way we do? 

Stanislas DehaeneChaire Psychologie cognitive expérimentaleAnnée 2025-2026Collège de FranceColloque : Seeing the Mind, Educating the BrainTheme: Human SingularityUniquely Human Prediction?Colloque - Floris de Lange : Uniquely Human Prediction?Floris de LangeRésuméThe brain is fundamentally a predictive organ that uses internal models to extrapolate future events from current inputs. While this predictive capacity exists across species, what may be uniquely human are the specific internal models we employ. Using AI tools to quantify predictability in naturalistic environments, we can examine prediction at multiple levels of abstraction. In my talk I will highlight recent work from the domain of language, music and visual perception, elucidating how uniquely human experiences and capabilities shape our predictive models of the world.

Stanislas DehaeneChaire Psychologie cognitive expérimentaleAnnée 2025-2026Collège de FranceColloque : Seeing the Mind, Educating the BrainTheme: Human SingularityThe What?, How? And Why? Of Behavior: Using Cognitive Computational Models to Answer Distinct Questions about Human CognitionColloque - Valentin Wyart : The What?, How? And Why? Of Behavior: Using Cognitive Computational Models to Answer Distinct Questions about Human CognitionValentin WyartRésuméQuantitative modeling approaches are routinely used in cognitive science to make sense of behavior. Statistical models are designed to test *what* specific patterns are present in behavior, whereas cognitive computational models are developed to describe *how* specific behavioral patterns may emerge from latent cognitive processes. These two types of modeling approaches have successfully identified characteristic (and sometimes suboptimal) features of human learning and decision-making under uncertainty. In this talk, I will argue that cognitive computational models can be used to answer the distinct question of *why* these characteristic features are there. I will use recent studies that rely on different classes of models (low-dimensional algorithmic models, high-dimensional neural networks) to explain characteristic features of human cognition in terms of latent objectives and constraints.

Stanislas DehaeneChaire Psychologie cognitive expérimentaleAnnée 2025-2026Collège de FranceColloque : Seeing the Mind, Educating the BrainTheme: Human SingularityDissecting the Language of Thought Hypothesis across Marr's LevelsColloque - Mathias Sablé-Meyer : Dissecting the Language of Thought Hypothesis across Marr's LevelsMathias Sablé-MeyerRésuméThe Language of Thought (LoT) hypothesis posits that mental representations are best understood as programme-like objects; indeed, "thoughts" share properties such as productivity and systematicity with programming languages. I tackle questions that arise from taking this hypothesis at face value and unfolding its predictions, from computational accounts to mechanistic implementation. First, zooming on humans' cognition of geometric shapes, I show that in all human groups tested (adults, children, congenitally blind), the perception of shapes is heavily influenced by geometric features. Then, I show using MEG and fMRI that the neural signature of these exact geometric properties is separate both in timing and localisation from typical visual processes. To generalise beyond quadrilaterals, I commit to a proposition for a generative language of shapes to account for the complexity of geometric shapes in humans, while implementing an algorithm for perception-as-program-inference. Finally, building on recent results in rodent neuroscience, I sketch a research programme and give preliminary results on a mechanistic understanding of how program-like representations might be implemented by populations of neurons.

Stanislas DehaeneChaire Psychologie cognitive expérimentaleAnnée 2025-2026Collège de FranceColloque : Seeing the Mind, Educating the BrainTheme: Human SingularityScaling Intelligence the Human Way Colloque - Josh Tenenbaum : Scaling Intelligence the Human Way Josh Tenenbaum

Stanislas DehaeneChaire Psychologie cognitive expérimentaleAnnée 2025-2026Collège de FranceColloque : Seeing the Mind, Educating the BrainConcluding RemarksColloque - Stanislas Dehaene : Concluding RemarksStanislas Dehaene

Stanislas DehaeneChaire Psychologie cognitive expérimentaleAnnée 2025-2026Collège de FranceColloque : Seeing the Mind, Educating the BrainTheme: Numerical and Mathematical DevelopmentThe Relationship Between The Approximate Number System (ANS) And Math Cognition—Evidence From Across Several ContinentsColloque - Justin Halberda : The Relationship Between The Approximate Number System (ANS) And Math Cognition—Evidence From Across Several ContinentsJustin HalberdaRésuméWhat might be the relationship between our fanciest, most-recent cognitive inventions (e.g., Formal Mathematics) and our most evolutionarily ancient abilities to approximate the world (e.g., The Approximate Number System)? I will review the field's evidence, highlighting data from across 4 Continents.

Stanislas DehaeneChaire Psychologie cognitive expérimentaleAnnée 2025-2026Collège de FranceColloque : Seeing the Mind, Educating the BrainTheme: Numerical and Mathematical DevelopmentIlluminating Fractions Learning: Neuronal Recycling of Non-Symbolic Ratios for Symbolic FractionsColloque - Edward Hubbard : Illuminating Fractions Learning: Neuronal Recycling of Non-Symbolic Ratios for Symbolic FractionsEdward HubbardRésuméWithin mathematics, fractions hold a special place. They present perennial difficulties to students, and yet, mastering fractions is a critical stepping stone towards algebra and higher-order mathematics. More than 20 years ago, Stanislas Dehaene suggested that fractions are difficult because they lack the intuitive perceptual foundation that permits us to readily comprehend whole numbers and instead may depend on formal and symbolic processes. Here, I will present research from my lab showing that fractions may indeed have a perceptual foundation, and that this perceptual foundation may be recycled to allow us to understand symbolic fractions. Behaviorally, we have shown that symbolic fractions do not need to be processed componentially and instead can be represented on a coherent mental number. We show that wholistic fraction comparisons (and translation to decimals) does not require time consuming computations, and that non-symbolic ratio perception in college students and American elementary school children predicts formal fractions skills. Using fMRI, we have further shown that non-symbolic ratio perception reliable recruits right parietal cortex, even before the onset of formal schooling, and these parietal systems become tuned to symbolic fractions after as little as two years of formal education. Despite this evidence that fractions do, indeed, have a perceptual foundation, they still present significant difficulties. I will close by arguing that fractions (and other domains) may be difficult not due to a lack of foundational systems, but rather, due to educational methods that fail to align with these perceptual foundations. Furthermore, I will argue that research in numerical cognition can (and should!) provide new pedagogical approaches that better align with the foundational systems we have discovered to help students better grasp higher-order mathematical concepts. 

Stanislas DehaeneChaire Psychologie cognitive expérimentaleAnnée 2025-2026Collège de FranceColloque : Seeing the Mind, Educating the BrainTheme: Infancy, Development, and EducationWhy Is Conceptual Learning so Hard?Colloque - Véronique Izard : Why Is Conceptual Learning so Hard?Véronique IzardRésuméLearning concepts can be very difficult, especially in science and mathematics. For instance, children continue to struggle with fractions even after several years of formal instruction on the topic; and adults display persistent difficulties with algebra, biology or physics. Why these failures—and what happens during the long periods of time during which learners are struggling? While most theories of conceptual learning contend that learning proceeds gradually, little step by little step, I will present evidence showing that people experience sudden Eureka moments while learning mathematics. During these episodes, an insight suddenly breaks into consciousness, leading to a leap in understanding. These findings invite us to reconsider learning mechanisms in light of theories of conscious and unconscious processing.

Stanislas DehaeneChaire Psychologie cognitive expérimentaleAnnée 2025-2026Collège de FranceColloque : Seeing the Mind, Educating the BrainTheme: Numerical and Mathematical DevelopmentSpatiotemporal Dynamics of Arithmetic Computation in the Human BrainColloque - Pedro Pinheiro-Chagas : Spatiotemporal Dynamics of Arithmetic Computation in the Human BrainPedro Pinheiro-ChagasRésuméMathematics is among humanity's most remarkable achievements, yet we still lack a comprehensive understanding of how the brain performs even simple arithmetic. In this talk, I will present a series of studies investigating the encoding of elementary math, as well as the architecture, spatiotemporal dynamics, and causal role of the underlying brain networks. I will show that arithmetic computations selectively activate a distinct network in the human brain, which dissociates from language areas and overlaps with regions related to object recognition, visuospatial attention, working memory and relational reasoning. Next, using machine learning and intracranial recordings in humans, I will demonstrate how we can precisely track the cascade of unfolding representational codes during mental arithmetic, shedding light on the roles of each hub of the math network. Overall, this talk will provide insights into how elementary math concepts are implemented in the brain and, more broadly, show how the case study of math cognition can help us understand the algorithms of human intelligence.

Stanislas DehaeneChaire Psychologie cognitive expérimentaleAnnée 2025-2026Collège de FranceColloque : Seeing the Mind, Educating the BrainTheme: Perception and ConsciousnessBuilding a Theory of Consciousness, One Collaboration at a TimeColloque - Lucia Melloni : Building a Theory of Consciousness, One Collaboration at a TimeLucia MelloniRésuméWhat does it take to transform consciousness from a philosophical puzzle into a scientific theory? Few frameworks have shaped this quest as deeply as Stanislas Dehaene's Global Neuronal Workspace Theory (GNWT). By proposing that conscious access arises through large-scale broadcasting and ignition across fronto-parietal networks, GNWT provided both a conceptual framework and concrete, testable predictions

Stanislas DehaeneChaire Psychologie cognitive expérimentaleAnnée 2025-2026Collège de FranceColloque : Seeing the Mind, Educating the BrainTheme: Infancy, Development, and EducationDevelopmental Origins of Human CuriosityColloque - Lisa Feigenson : Developmental Origins of Human CuriosityLisa FeigensonRésuméCuriosity underpins the greatest of human achievements, from exploring the reaches of our solar system to discovering the structure of our own minds.  Where does this drive come from?  Here I suggest that far from being reliant on language and sophisticated metacognitive skills, curiosity is present from our earliest days.  In support of this claim, I discuss work showing that preverbal infants not only experience curiosity but harness it: when babies' predictions fail to accord with their observations, they look longer, learn more, and produce exploratory behaviors.  Critically, their exploration is guided by a desire to explain—long before they have the words to describe what they see, babies seek to understand why things happen as they do. In this sense, the curiosity that emerges in infancy lays the foundation for a lifetime of discovery. 

Stanislas DehaeneChaire Psychologie cognitive expérimentaleAnnée 2025-2026Collège de FranceColloque : Seeing the Mind, Educating the BrainTheme: Infancy, Development, and EducationThe state of the State of the Arts of the Language of thought Colloque - Luca Bonatti : The state of the State of the Arts of the Language of thought Luca BonattiRésuméI will revise the state of the art of the current evidence for Language of thought. I will focus on the identification of primitive operation in early infancy, and will speculate on the relation between natural language and logical primitives.

Stanislas DehaeneChaire Psychologie cognitive expérimentaleAnnée 2025-2026Collège de FranceColloque : Seeing the Mind, Educating the BrainTheme: Perception and ConsciousnessThe Global Neuronal Workspace from the Molecular to the Cognitive Level: Consequences for Pathology and PharmacologyColloque - Jean-Pierre Changeux : The Global Neuronal Workspace from the Molecular to the Cognitive Level: Consequences for Pathology and PharmacologyJean-Pierre ChangeuxRésuméThe global neuronal workspace (GNW) theory originates from decades-long productive dialogs between Dehaene & Changeux which aimed, in the late 80's, at the elaboration of formal neuronal networks of cognitive functions. They initially included birdsong learning by selection, the Wisconsin card sorting task, infants numerosity detection...All these models were grounded on a molecular level which included allosteric neurotransmitter receptors. In 1998, the "global neuronal workspace" was integrated into a formal organism in order to pass the effort-full, "conscious", Stroop task. It was postulated to consist of a brain-scale—multimodal & horizontal—network of widely distributed neurons with long axon neurons, distinct from modality-specific localized non-conscious processors, including neurons which included the prefontal, parieto-temporal, cingulate… areas. The access of an outside representation to the conscious workspace would manifest itself by an "ignition" of the workspace network. At this stage, an important number of imaging and electrophysiological data appear consistent with the GNW theory. In this contribution, emphasis shall be given to the bottomup contribution of the molecular level and its consequences for the understanding of neuropsychiatric diseases and rational drug design, in the larger context of a novel precision pharmacology.

Stanislas DehaeneChaire Psychologie cognitive expérimentaleAnnée 2025-2026Collège de FranceColloque : Seeing the Mind, Educating the BrainTheme: Infancy, Development, and EducationDiscovering Combinatorial Affordances of Elements to Form Gestalts: Learning to "See Ideas via Groupitizing and Visual Word FormsColloque - Bruce McCandliss : Discovering Combinatorial Affordances of Elements to Form Gestalts: Learning to "See Ideas via Groupitizing and Visual Word FormsBruce McCandlissRésuméEarly education is a time of transformation in the way children come to see ideas in the world in the world, partly by a process of learning to combine visual elements to form gestalts. In this talk, I will expand upon these combinatorial learning phenomena across two systems that are transformed in the mind and brain by education. First, I will review research on groupitizing, the ability of children to combine their knowledge of small subitizable sets to access the cardinal value of larger sets, and how this emerging ability is intrinsically linked to educational achievement and potentially linked to individual differences in the organization of cortical activity. Secondly, I will review research on the cognitive and neural basis of learning to see visual word forms via combinations of letters, a process also intrinsically linked to success in education. 

Stanislas DehaeneChaire Psychologie cognitive expérimentaleAnnée 2025-2026Collège de FranceColloque : Seeing the Mind, Educating the BrainTheme: Perception and ConsciousnessThe Global Workspace Model of Consciousness: Then and NowColloque - Claire Sergent : The Global Workspace Model of Consciousness: Then and NowClaire Sergent

Stanislas DehaeneChaire Psychologie cognitive expérimentaleAnnée 2025-2026Collège de FranceColloque : Seeing the Mind, Educating the BrainTheme: Perception and ConsciousnessNeural Mechanisms of Conscious Visual Perception in HumansColloque - Biyu Jade He : Neural Mechanisms of Conscious Visual Perception in HumansBiyu Jade HeRésuméIn this talk, I will discuss insights from our recent work probing the neural mechanisms underlying conscious visual perception in humans by leveraging multimodal neuroimaging and computational approaches. I will focus on the roles of slow cortical potentials and spontaneous ongoing brain activity as revealed by our recent empirical work. I will also discuss neural and computational mechanisms underpinning humans' remarkable one-shot learning capability in visual perception, as well as how lifelong prior knowledge influences conscious perception.

Stanislas DehaeneChaire Psychologie cognitive expérimentaleAnnée 2025-2026Collège de FranceColloque : Seeing the Mind, Educating the BrainTheme: Numerical and Mathematical DevelopmentPattern Codes for Numerical Quantity during Perception and Internal Computation in the Human BrainColloque - Evelyn Eger : Pattern Codes for Numerical Quantity during Perception and Internal Computation in the Human BrainEvelyn EgerRésuméDuring the last two decades, neuroimaging has generated a wealth of knowledge on how number processing inserts itself into the functional neuroanatomy of the human brain. We understand quite well now what are the cortical areas involved, and the neural codes for individual quantities as perceptual entities. Still, we lack a general understanding of how quantity representations are transformed during mental computations, and how or even where results of such computations are coded in the brain. By using ultra-high-field (UHF) imaging during an approximate calculation task designed to disentangle in- and outputs of a computation from the operation, we uncovered a representation of internally generated quantities which was most prominent in higher-level regions like the angular gyrus and lateral prefrontal cortex, and the intra-parietal sulcus. Intraparietal sensory-motor integration regions were the only ones found to share the same representational space for stimulus-evoked and internally generated quantities. This suggests the transformation may occur in these regions, before result numbers are maintained for task purposes in higher-level areas in a format possibly detached from sensory-evoked inputs. Results illustrate the power of UHF imaging to finely characterize neural codes underlying human numerical abilities with non-invasive methods.

Stanislas DehaeneChaire Psychologie cognitive expérimentaleAnnée 2025-2026Collège de FranceColloque : Seeing the Mind, Educating the BrainPart 2: Training and Educating the BrainIn Search of the Neural Code of LanguageColloque - Jean-Rémi King : In Search of the Neural Code of LanguageJean-Rémi KingRésuméHow does the brain transform words into meaning? By aligning insights from linguistics, neuroscience, and Large Language Models (LLMs), we observe that AI models and the human brain surprisingly converge on similar representational principles. Using neuroimaging and electrophysiology, we find that as LLMs improve at language tasks, their internal activations increasingly mirror cortical activity, and effectively enable us to decode meaning directly from these brain signals. Building on these results, we will outline a roadmap to uncover the neural code of language: (1) a benchmark dataset of brain recordings to build a "Rosetta Stone" across humans and models, (2) unique intracranial data from young children to characterize the computational principles of language development, and (3) a mathematical framework to understand the geometry of the neural representations of symbolic structures. Together, this research program moves us closer to deciphering how the human brain learns, represents and manipulates the structures of language.

Stanislas DehaenePsychologie cognitive expérimentaleCollège de FranceAnnée 2025-2026Colloque: Seeing the Mind, Educating the BrainStanislas Dehaene: IntroductionColloque en anglais.PrésentationOver the past decades, behavioral measures, brain imaging and neurophysiological recordings, in both humans and non-human primates, have led to major progress in understanding the neuronal and circuit-level properties that support cognitive functions such as visual recognition, spatial navigation and decision making. Human cognition is special, however, in its unique capacity to acquire new concepts and abilities through learning and education, particularly in the domain of language and mathematics. How far are we from understanding the neural mechanisms that allow us to acquire abstract concepts and symbols? Can we understand which cognitive toolkit is present in all brains since infancy, and how it changes with education? Can we separate the mechanisms of conscious and unconscious processing, and their respective contributions to human learning? To what extent does current animal research shed sufficient light on human computations? Are we still missing fundamental ideas, concepts, theories, and empirical tools to bridge between neuroscience and higher-level cognition? On the occasion of Stanislas' sixtieth birthday, he is delighted to invite some of the leading scientists—Jean-Pierre Changeux, Nancy Kanwisher, Elizabeth Spelke, Naama Friedmann, among others—who have played a key role in shaping his ideas.The program will feature discussions on the future of our field over the next two decades, along with a celebration of science, life, and friendship.

Stanislas DehaenePsychologie cognitive expérimentaleCollège de FranceAnnée 2025-2026Colloque: Seeing the Mind, Educating the BrainPart 1: Seeing and Decoding the MindIntuitive Physical Reasoning in the Human BrainColloque - Nancy Kanwisher: Intuitive Physical Reasoning in the Human BrainNancy KanwisherMITRésuméVisual scene understand requires much more than a list of the objects present in the scene and their locations. To understanding a scene, plan action on it, and predict what will happen next we must extract the relationships between objects (e.g., support and attachment), their physical properties (e.g., mass and material), and the forces acting upon them. One view is that we do this with the use of a "mental physics engine" that represents this information and runs forward simulations to predict what will happen next. Over the last several years we have been testing this idea with Josh Tenenbaum using fMRI. I will review evidence that certain brain regions in the parietal and frontal lobes (but not the ventral visual pathway) behave as expected if they implement a mental physics engine: they respond more strongly when deciding about physical than visual properties and when viewing physical versus social stimuli (Fischer et al, 2016), and they contain scenario-invariant information about object mass inferred from motion trajectories (Schwettmann et al, 2019), the stability of a configuration of objects (Pramod et al, 2022), and whether two objects are in contact with each other (Pramod et al 2025). Most tellingly, we can decode predicted collision events from perceived collision events, as expected if these brain regions run forward simulations of what will happen next. I will discuss the scope of engagement of this system by not just rigid "Things" but fluid "Stuff" (Paulun et al 2025), and (at least under some circumstances) by language. I will argue that these findings (as well as the poor performance of deep net models on many intuitive physical tasks) provide preliminary evidence for a physics engine in the human parietal and frontal cortex.

Stanislas DehaeneChaire Psychologie cognitive expérimentaleAnnée 2025-2026Collège de FranceColloque : Seeing the Mind, Educating the BrainPart 1: Seeing and Decoding the MindExploring Consciousness at the Edge: Global Neuronal Workspace Framework & NeurologyColloque - Lionel Naccache : Exploring Consciousness at the Edge: Global Neuronal Workspace Framework & NeurologyLionel NaccacheRésuméAfter a brief synthetic introduction to the Global Neuronal Workspace (GNW) theoretical framework, I will show how the exploration of conscious state and conscious access in extreme neurological or physiological conditions can be mutually beneficial by: (i) improving medical and ethical care of patients, and (ii) enriching cognitive neuroscience of consciousness by testing key theoretical predictions in unusual situations. I will illustrate this bidirectional approach by focusing on Disorders of Consciousness (i.e.: vegetative states also coined unresponsive wakefulness syndrome, minimally conscious state and related conditions), but I will also address more briefly key recent findings in epilepsy, hemispherotomy and sleep.

Stanislas DehaenePsychologie cognitive expérimentaleCollège de FranceAnnée 2025-2026Colloque: Seeing the Mind, Educating the BrainPart 1: Seeing and Decoding the MindConscious Perception: The Propagation of Selection Signals through the Global Neuronal WorkspaceColloque - Pieter Roelfsema: Conscious Perception: The Propagation of Selection Signals through the Global Neuronal WorkspacePieter RoelfsemaNetherlands Institute for Neuroscience, Amsterdam & Institut de la Vision, ParisRésuméhe Global Neuronal Workspace (GNW) theory (Baars, 1988; Dehaene et al., 1998) proposes that information must be broadcast across widely distributed networks to enter conscious awareness. But what exactly is the information that is exchanged? I will argue that the GNW provides the substrate for the spread of selection signals and use this perspective to refine the distinction between access and phenomenal consciousness.Access consciousness corresponds to the information currently circulating within the GNW. In perception, this is the information selected by object-based attention, enabling a degree of representational flexibility that would otherwise not be attainable. In thought, access consciousness corresponds to the attended content of working memory, i.e. the items that can be actively transformed, combined, or used to retrieve associations. Phenomenal consciousness, by contrast, refers to the set of representations that are not yet part of the GNW, but that could be attended next because they are captured by the senses or because they are in an unattended memory form.I will illustrate these ideas in perception and memory. Perceptual experiments address the construction of coherent object representations through the spread of object-based attention, which at a neuronal level, corresponds to the spread of enhanced activity. In these studies, access consciousness aligns with object-based attention, and the GNW acts as the scaffold that allows selection signals to label all features of a perceptual object. This binding mechanism is incremental, time-consuming and explains why we consciously perceive unified, multi-feature objects.When considering memory, I will contrast iconic memory, supported by transient activity in early visual cortex, to working memory representations in higher areas that are maintained by persistent firing. Items in access awareness are attended within working memory and show stronger and more stable activity than non-attended items. I will show how the spread of selection signals among attended working memory items through the GNW supports conscious cognitive functions, such as resolving pronouns during reading and the retrieval of associations between concepts.Together, these findings suggest a revised view of the relationship between attention and consciousness, positioning the GNW as the orchestrator of distributed neuronal representations through the spread of attentional selection signals.

Stanislas DehaeneChaire Psychologie cognitive expérimentaleAnnée 2025-2026Collège de FranceColloque : Seeing the Mind, Educating the BrainPart 2: Training and Educating the BrainEducabilityColloque - Elizabeth Spelke : EducabilityElizabeth Spelke

Stanislas DehaeneChaire Psychologie cognitive expérimentaleAnnée 2025-2026Collège de FranceColloque : Seeing the Mind, Educating the BrainPart 2: Training and Educating the BrainSeeing Syntax Everywhere: Syntactic Theory, Language Impairments, and the BrainColloque - Naama Friedmann : Seeing Syntax Everywhere: Syntactic Theory, Language Impairments, and the BrainNaama FriedmannRésuméA key notion in linguistics is that of syntactic movement. I will show that this notion and the further theoretical observations and generalizations regarding movement are useful in accounting for language impairments. I will describe syntactic impairments of various sources: acquired (following stroke, tumour, tumor resection), developmental, and neurodegenerative (progressive aphasia, Parkinson's Disease, Machado Joseph Ataxia), and show how useful a good syntactic theory is in assessing, describing, and treating these impairments. 

Stanislas DehaeneChaire Psychologie cognitive expérimentaleAnnée 2025-2026Collège de FranceColloque : Seeing the Mind, Educating the BrainPart 1: Seeing and Decoding the MindThe Control of Sequence Working Memory in the Prefrontal CortexColloque - Liping Wang : The Control of Sequence Working Memory in the Prefrontal CortexLiping Wang

Stanislas DehaeneChaire Psychologie cognitive expérimentaleAnnée 2025-2026Collège de FranceColloque : Seeing the Mind, Educating the BrainPart 2: Training and Educating the BrainThe Neuronal Basis of Numerical Cognition in Humans and Nonhuman PrimatesColloque - Andreas Nieder : The Neuronal Basis of Numerical Cognition in Humans and Nonhuman PrimatesAndreas NiederInstitut de neurobiologie, département de biologie, université de Tübingen, AllemagneRésuméOur understanding of numbers, vital to our scientifically and technically advanced culture, has deep biological roots. Research across developmental psychology, anthropology, and animal cognition suggests that our ability to count symbolically arises from more primitive non-symbolic number representations. By studying single-neuron activity in associative brain areas of awake human patients and monkeys, we aim to uncover the physiological principles behind how numbers are represented in the brain. In both species, we've identified "number neurons" that encode set sizes regardless of how the stimuli are presented. These neurons play a crucial role in processing numerical information during goal-directed behavior. Moreover, investigating how numbers are processed in working memory offers insights into high-level cognitive control functions. Comparative research in numerical cognition is uniquely positioned to unravel the brain processes enabling humans to transition from nonsymbolic to symbolic representations, a hallmark of our species.

La formation, c'est le nerf de la guerre métapolitique. Mais attention, pas n'importe quelle formation ! À l'heure où les réseaux sociaux nous bombardent de publicités tapageuses – apprenez la philosophie grecque en dix leçons ou survivez à une attaque atomique en un week-end – il faut remettre les pendules à l'heure. On ne remplit pas son cerveau comme un caddie de supermarché ! Le terme "formation" est aujourd'hui largement galvaudé. Bien sûr, on peut apprendre seul, surtout avec la profusion d'outils numériques. Mais la véritable formation, celle qui élève, se fait en communauté, dans l'émulation collective. C'est l'esprit de promotion, de compagnonnage, la rencontre entre un maître et un apprenti, qui installe la verticalité nécessaire à un apprentissage digne de ce nom. Car entre les formations bidon de la "Bullshit Nation" et une éducation nationale qui déséduque, on est loin, très loin, de la Paideia grecque, cet idéal d'éducation qui forme des hommes complets, ancrés dans leurs racines et tournés vers l'excellence. Une formation vertueuse, c'est celle qui guide la jeune pousse fragile vers le soleil, avec un tuteur solide, pas celle qui déforme ou nivelle par le bas....Hébergé par Ausha. Visitez ausha.co/politique-de-confidentialite pour plus d'informations.

Héritage direct de la Seconde Guerre mondiale, la conquête spatiale fascine autant qu'elle interroge. Propulsée par un élan technologique, scientifique et philosophique, elle s'est accompagnée d'une réflexion sur l'inéluctabilité de cette quête. Tout commence dans les années 1940 : les ingénieurs allemands, auteurs des V2, sont recrutés par les grandes puissances. Leurs recherches, conçues pour des missiles balistiques, servent bientôt à un combat inédit. La guerre froide se transforme en course à la suprématie technologique : l'URSS frappe avec Sputnik en 1957 puis Gagarine en 1961, les États-Unis répondent avec la Lune en 1969. Ces exploits issus de missiles reconvertis nourrissent l'imaginaire collectif, mais restent l'apanage de quelques États — puis d'entreprises comme SpaceX. Aujourd'hui, si la propulsion touche ses limites, les applications commerciales se multiplient : satellites de communication, GPS, observation de la Terre, télescopes spatiaux. La conquête façonne nos vies autant que nos savoirs. Les sondes explorent planètes et astéroïdes, enrichissant notre vision du cosmos au moment même où l'artificialisation de la vie nous coupe de la nature environnante et intérieure. Mais rien ne suscite plus de passion que le vol habité et la colonisation. Malgré défis physiologiques, techniques et financiers, la science-fiction entretient le rêve d'un destin humain écrit ailleurs. Reste une question : si cet objectif est atteint, il ne le sera pas par tous, mais par certains peuples, certaines civilisations. Est-ce une nécessité évolutive ou un fantasme coûteux ? Et, en cas de succès, que ferons-nous ? Créer un monde nouveau, répéter les erreurs terrestres, ou partir pour mieux revenir, forts de l'expérience acquise ? Pour aborder ce sujet, nous recevons : ▸ Christophe Belleval, astrophysicien et maître de conférences. Après un début de carrière dans l'industrie, il a réalisé une première thèse de doctorat, à l'invitation du Professeur Jacques Blamont, cofondateur du Centre national d'études spatiales (CNES), qui souhaitait renouveler les méthodes de conception et de réalisation de systèmes spatiaux innovants. Il est de même titulaire d'un doctorat d'astrophysique à l'Observatoire de Paris en radioastronomie. Il est auditeur du Centre des hautes études de l'Armement (CHEAr) et publie des articles scientifiques dans la revue Éléments. ▸ Et Gersende Bessède, écrivain de science-fiction, techno-accélérationniste et ancienne assistante de Maurice Dantec. Vous pourrez retrouver les chroniques des auditeurs de l'Iliade : ▸ "Perspectives identitaires" de Raphaël Ayma, auditeur de la promotion Frédéric Mistral de l'Institut Iliade. ▸ Autour d'un vers, le rendez-vous poétique de Frédérique de Saint-Quio, auditrice de la promotion Homère. ▸ Les chroniques musicales de Pierre Leprince, auditeur de la promotion Patrick Pearse de l'Iliade. ▸ La boussole artistique de Gabrielle Fouquet.Hébergé par Ausha. Visitez ausha.co/politique-de-confidentialite pour plus d'informations.

Damien est sorti de son trou! Shamelessplug Hackfest Swag Join Hackfest/La French Connection Discord Join Hackfest us on Masodon Conférence GoSEC 2025 - Montréal - 10-11 sept 2025 - Colloque cybersécurité et protection des données personnelles - Saint-Hyacinthe - 2 octobre 2025 Hackfest - Québec - 16-17-18 Octobre 2025 POLAR - Québec - 16 Octobre 2025 Montréal Connecte 2025 - Montréal - 28-31 octobre 2025 - Cyberchess les 29-30 octobre - Latvia Nouvelles Câble sous-marin coupé Microsoft s'excuse pour la “latence” de son flux Azure. C'est rappeler que les fonds sous-marins ne cachent pas que des monstres et autres Kraken. Arnaque cinglée : faux avis de « maniaque » et piège financier De fausses affiches annonçant un « maniaque » mènent via QR code à une arnaque financière sur Telegram. Une fraude mêlant peur publique et cybercriminalité. Touriste en Grèce : quand des cafards IA deviennent une arme de chantage numérique Un touriste en Grèce a utilisé l'intelligence artificielle pour générer de faux cafards et obtenir une réduction d'hôtel. Une fraude qui révèle le potentiel inquiétant de l'IA dans la cybercriminalité. Astronaute fictif, vraie arnaque au Japon Un faux astronaute a escroqué une grand-mère japonaise de 6 200 € en prétextant un besoin d'oxygène spatial. En France, ce sont les “chanteurs” à la mode qui sont utilisés dans des escroqueries. Exemple avec Julien Doré Thaïlande : arrestation d'escrocs au SMS, sous-traitants d'un réseau chinois Arrestation à Bangkok : deux Thaïlandais utilisaient un SMS blaster pour diffuser de faux messages bancaires, sous la direction d'un réseau chinois. Un hacker andalou faussait ses notes grâce à un piratage Un étudiant arrêté à Séville pour piratage de notes sur Séneca. L'affaire révèle la vulnérabilité des systèmes éducatifs aux cyberattaques. Cyberattaque contre Rosneft en Allemagne : un procès sous haute tension Procès à Berlin d'un hacker accusé d'avoir saboté Rosneft Deutschland. Révèle la vulnérabilité énergétique allemande face au cyberconflit. Fermeture de Nsw2u et de sites pirates de jeux vidéo Le FBI et le FIOD ont démantelé Nsw2u et d'autres sites pirates de jeux Switch et PS4. Illustre l'enjeu cyber et économique du secteur vidéoludique. Démantèlement de Streameast, le géant du piratage sportif Démantèlement de Streameast en Égypte : la plus grande plateforme de streaming sportif illégal. Accusée de blanchiment de 6 millions d'euros, elle est neutralisée. Un seul fournisseur, toute une nation en otage Miljödata, fournisseur RH suédois, piraté. 200 communes paralysées. Une leçon choc sur les risques d'un numérique centralisé sans résilience. 62IX et HKVD, l'ombre numérique derrière les failles des infrastructures critiques (RUSSE) 62IX GROUP et HKVD : intrusion réelle ou campagne d'influence ? Décryptage des récits techniques, commerciaux et idéologiques autour des infrastructures critiques. Cyberattaque au Muséum d'histoire naturelle : activités perturbées et exposition annulée Cyberattaque au Muséum d'histoire naturelle de Paris. Recherche paralysée, exposition annulée, enquête en cours. Inquiétude croissante face aux menaces numériques. Le phishing fatal : comment « Sombreofficiel » a failli faire vaciller GRDF Un simple clic a suffi à « Sombreofficiel », mineur au moment des faits. Accès aux données de centaines de clients de GRDF. Revente via Telegram et jugement au tribunal pour enfants de Paris. Arnaque au trading crypto : l'affaire Marginswap, Lucas BTC et Tianna Escroquerie crypto Marginswap orchestrée par Lucas BTC et Tianna. Promesses de gains, blocage des retraits, extorsion, nettoyage de preuves. Témoignages, analyse du modus operandi et pistes pour les victimes et autorités cyber. Crew Patrick Mathieu Damien Bancal Crédits Montage audio par Hackfest Communication Music par Nibana – Earth From Above - Legacy (feat. Suduaya) Locaux virtuels par Streamyard

Damien est sorti de son trou! Shamelessplug Hackfest Swag Join Hackfest/La French Connection Discord Join Hackfest us on Masodon Conférence GoSEC 2025 - Montréal - 10-11 sept 2025 - Colloque cybersécurité et protection des données personnelles - Saint-Hyacinthe - 2 octobre 2025 Hackfest - Québec - 16-17-18 Octobre 2025 POLAR - Québec - 16 Octobre 2025 Montréal Connecte 2025 - Montréal - 28-31 octobre 2025 - Cyberchess les 29-30 octobre - Latvia Nouvelles Câble sous-marin coupé Microsoft s'excuse pour la “latence” de son flux Azure. C'est rappeler que les fonds sous-marins ne cachent pas que des monstres et autres Kraken. Arnaque cinglée : faux avis de « maniaque » et piège financier De fausses affiches annonçant un « maniaque » mènent via QR code à une arnaque financière sur Telegram. Une fraude mêlant peur publique et cybercriminalité. Touriste en Grèce : quand des cafards IA deviennent une arme de chantage numérique Un touriste en Grèce a utilisé l'intelligence artificielle pour générer de faux cafards et obtenir une réduction d'hôtel. Une fraude qui révèle le potentiel inquiétant de l'IA dans la cybercriminalité. Astronaute fictif, vraie arnaque au Japon Un faux astronaute a escroqué une grand-mère japonaise de 6 200 € en prétextant un besoin d'oxygène spatial. En France, ce sont les “chanteurs” à la mode qui sont utilisés dans des escroqueries. Exemple avec Julien Doré Thaïlande : arrestation d'escrocs au SMS, sous-traitants d'un réseau chinois Arrestation à Bangkok : deux Thaïlandais utilisaient un SMS blaster pour diffuser de faux messages bancaires, sous la direction d'un réseau chinois. Un hacker andalou faussait ses notes grâce à un piratage Un étudiant arrêté à Séville pour piratage de notes sur Séneca. L'affaire révèle la vulnérabilité des systèmes éducatifs aux cyberattaques. Cyberattaque contre Rosneft en Allemagne : un procès sous haute tension Procès à Berlin d'un hacker accusé d'avoir saboté Rosneft Deutschland. Révèle la vulnérabilité énergétique allemande face au cyberconflit. Fermeture de Nsw2u et de sites pirates de jeux vidéo Le FBI et le FIOD ont démantelé Nsw2u et d'autres sites pirates de jeux Switch et PS4. Illustre l'enjeu cyber et économique du secteur vidéoludique. Démantèlement de Streameast, le géant du piratage sportif Démantèlement de Streameast en Égypte : la plus grande plateforme de streaming sportif illégal. Accusée de blanchiment de 6 millions d'euros, elle est neutralisée. Un seul fournisseur, toute une nation en otage Miljödata, fournisseur RH suédois, piraté. 200 communes paralysées. Une leçon choc sur les risques d'un numérique centralisé sans résilience. 62IX et HKVD, l'ombre numérique derrière les failles des infrastructures critiques (RUSSE) 62IX GROUP et HKVD : intrusion réelle ou campagne d'influence ? Décryptage des récits techniques, commerciaux et idéologiques autour des infrastructures critiques. Cyberattaque au Muséum d'histoire naturelle : activités perturbées et exposition annulée Cyberattaque au Muséum d'histoire naturelle de Paris. Recherche paralysée, exposition annulée, enquête en cours. Inquiétude croissante face aux menaces numériques. Le phishing fatal : comment « Sombreofficiel » a failli faire vaciller GRDF Un simple clic a suffi à « Sombreofficiel », mineur au moment des faits. Accès aux données de centaines de clients de GRDF. Revente via Telegram et jugement au tribunal pour enfants de Paris. Arnaque au trading crypto : l'affaire Marginswap, Lucas BTC et Tianna Escroquerie crypto Marginswap orchestrée par Lucas BTC et Tianna. Promesses de gains, blocage des retraits, extorsion, nettoyage de preuves. Témoignages, analyse du modus operandi et pistes pour les victimes et autorités cyber. Crew Patrick Mathieu Damien Bancal Crédits Montage audio par Hackfest Communication Music par Nibana – Earth From Above - Legacy (feat. Suduaya) Locaux virtuels par Streamyard

Samantha BessonDroit international des institutionsCollège de FranceAnnée 2025-2026The "Province of All Mankind"? Property in Outer Space under Public and Private International Law & PhilosophyColloque - Michela Massimi : Lunar Grabbing. On Scientific Commoning in Outer Space (and Oceanic Seabed too)Panel 3: The Relations between Scientific "Exploration" and Commercial "Exploitation" of Outer SpaceColloque organisé par la Pr Samantha Besson, chaire Droit international des institutions, les 25 et 26 septembre 2025PrésentationAs it is the case in other (marine or polar) "spaces" of international law usually defined negatively as areas beyond the (territorial) jurisdiction of States, a "non-appropriation" principle applies to the outer space (art. II 1967 Outer Space Treaty; art. 11(2-3) 1979 Moon Agreement). Despite later clarifications in the 1979 Moon Agreement, States still disagree, however, about both the material scope of the principle of non-appropriation (celestial bodies only, or both the bodies and their extracted resources) and its personal scope (public appropriation in the form of sovereign claims by States only, or both public and private appropriation). They also disagree about the implications of the second, more positive principle that was added in the Moon Agreement, i.e. that of "common heritage of mankind" (art. 11(1) Moon Agreement) and about the content of the further principle of "equitable access and sharing of benefits" (art. 11(7d) Moon Agreement) that applies to the common exploitation of celestial resources. In any case, due to the limited number of State ratifications (17 to date), the Moon Agreement is not considered as an expression of universally binding customary law. The same applies to the international regime for the common exploitation of the natural resources of celestial bodies foreseen by the agreement (art. 11(5-7) and 18 Moon Agreement).This disagreement is sharpened by the tension between those more recent principles, including non-appropriation through use, and the original principles of the international law of "areas beyond national jurisdiction", i.e. the principle of "freedom of exploration and use" (art. I(1) Outer Space Treaty) and its twin principle, i.e. the "freedom of scientific investigation" (art. I(3) Outer Space Treaty; art. 6(1) Moon Agreement). Those original principles have been left untouched by the new ones, indeed, and seem to accommodate free appropriation of resources through use, even if those freedoms have to be "carried out for the benefit and in the interests of all countries" (art. I(1) Outer Space Treaty; art. 4(1) Moon Agreement). The same tensions between the original principles and the subsequent ones also apply within other spaces of international law such as the high seas and deep seabed and have not been resolved by the 2023 Agreement on the Conservation and Sustainable Use of Marine Biological Diversity of Areas beyond National Jurisdiction.This indeterminacy has led certain States and regional organizations to adopt domestic (public and private) legislation, develop soft law and/or conclude bilateral agreements to secure the property rights and investments of private companies authorized by those States to explore and exploit celestial bodies and their resources. Their hope thereby is to shape what is called, in international treaty law, a "subsequent practice in the application of treaties establishing an agreement". If those States were to succeed, that practice could influence the interpretation of the Outer Space Treaty. After all, this is exactly what some States did in 1982 after the adoption of the Convention of the Law on the Sea and following their disagreements about the organization of the international regime for the common exploitation of the deep seabed resources in the convention. So-doing, they steered that regime towards the 1994 compromise and the modification of the convention that ensued and, arguably, led to that regime's contemporary deadlock.This situation raises numerous questions about the kind of international law of outer space the international community of peoples should aim at developing. This is especially the case if we are to prevent the "enclosure" through public and private appropriation of what art. I(1) Outer Space Treaty refers to as the "province of all mankind". It also raises difficult questions about the state of our legal imaginary at a turning point of life on Earth. Are our legal categories themselves at risk of being prematurely "enclosed" by the binary opposition between (State) territory and space, by the opposition between the "common" and the public or the private, and by a given articulation of property to sovereignty?This two-day conference will bring public and private international lawyers together with political and legal philosophers to discuss the complex issues raised by property in outer space, including its relations to the notions of territory, jurisdiction and sovereignty, but also the international legal status of scientific research, data and samples. The discussions will be organized around three central issues: (i) the relations between property, jurisdiction and sovereignty, and their implications in outer space; (ii) the prospects of "commoning" in outer space, and of a distinct future international institution and regime to govern the common use of celestial resources as currently discussed by the United Nations' Committee on the Peaceful Use of Outer Space (COPUOS); and (iii) the public and common good of science, and its implications for a better distinction between scientific "exploration" and commercial "use", exploitation or appropriation of and by science in outer space.Participants/Speakers: Philippe Achilleas (University of Paris-Saclay); Michael Byers (University of British Columbia, Vancouver); Isabel Feichtner (University of Würzburg); Stephan Hobe (University of Cologne); Maria Manoli (University of Aberdeen); Michela Massimi (University of Edinburgh); Alex Mills (University College, London); Margaret Moore (Queen's University, Ontario); Yannick Radi (Catholic University of Louvain); Lukas Rass-Masson (University of Toulouse Capitole); Anna Stilz (University of Berkeley); Fabio Tronchetti (University of Northumbria); Jonathan B. Wiener (Duke University); Katrina M. Wyman (New York University).

Samantha BessonDroit international des institutionsCollège de FranceAnnée 2025-2026The "Province of All Mankind"? Property in Outer Space under Public and Private International Law & PhilosophyColloque - Fabio Tronchetti : Rethinking "Common Heritage of Mankind" in the 21st Century: a Pathway towards Enabling Lunar Activities for the Benefit of AllPanel 3: The Relations between Scientific "Exploration" and Commercial "Exploitation" of Outer SpaceColloque organisé par la Pr Samantha Besson, chaire Droit international des institutions, les 25 et 26 septembre 2025PrésentationAs it is the case in other (marine or polar) "spaces" of international law usually defined negatively as areas beyond the (territorial) jurisdiction of States, a "non-appropriation" principle applies to the outer space (art. II 1967 Outer Space Treaty; art. 11(2-3) 1979 Moon Agreement). Despite later clarifications in the 1979 Moon Agreement, States still disagree, however, about both the material scope of the principle of non-appropriation (celestial bodies only, or both the bodies and their extracted resources) and its personal scope (public appropriation in the form of sovereign claims by States only, or both public and private appropriation). They also disagree about the implications of the second, more positive principle that was added in the Moon Agreement, i.e. that of "common heritage of mankind" (art. 11(1) Moon Agreement) and about the content of the further principle of "equitable access and sharing of benefits" (art. 11(7d) Moon Agreement) that applies to the common exploitation of celestial resources. In any case, due to the limited number of State ratifications (17 to date), the Moon Agreement is not considered as an expression of universally binding customary law. The same applies to the international regime for the common exploitation of the natural resources of celestial bodies foreseen by the agreement (art. 11(5-7) and 18 Moon Agreement).This disagreement is sharpened by the tension between those more recent principles, including non-appropriation through use, and the original principles of the international law of "areas beyond national jurisdiction", i.e. the principle of "freedom of exploration and use" (art. I(1) Outer Space Treaty) and its twin principle, i.e. the "freedom of scientific investigation" (art. I(3) Outer Space Treaty; art. 6(1) Moon Agreement). Those original principles have been left untouched by the new ones, indeed, and seem to accommodate free appropriation of resources through use, even if those freedoms have to be "carried out for the benefit and in the interests of all countries" (art. I(1) Outer Space Treaty; art. 4(1) Moon Agreement). The same tensions between the original principles and the subsequent ones also apply within other spaces of international law such as the high seas and deep seabed and have not been resolved by the 2023 Agreement on the Conservation and Sustainable Use of Marine Biological Diversity of Areas beyond National Jurisdiction.This indeterminacy has led certain States and regional organizations to adopt domestic (public and private) legislation, develop soft law and/or conclude bilateral agreements to secure the property rights and investments of private companies authorized by those States to explore and exploit celestial bodies and their resources. Their hope thereby is to shape what is called, in international treaty law, a "subsequent practice in the application of treaties establishing an agreement". If those States were to succeed, that practice could influence the interpretation of the Outer Space Treaty. After all, this is exactly what some States did in 1982 after the adoption of the Convention of the Law on the Sea and following their disagreements about the organization of the international regime for the common exploitation of the deep seabed resources in the convention. So-doing, they steered that regime towards the 1994 compromise and the modification of the convention that ensued and, arguably, led to that regime's contemporary deadlock.This situation raises numerous questions about the kind of international law of outer space the international community of peoples should aim at developing. This is especially the case if we are to prevent the "enclosure" through public and private appropriation of what art. I(1) Outer Space Treaty refers to as the "province of all mankind". It also raises difficult questions about the state of our legal imaginary at a turning point of life on Earth. Are our legal categories themselves at risk of being prematurely "enclosed" by the binary opposition between (State) territory and space, by the opposition between the "common" and the public or the private, and by a given articulation of property to sovereignty?This two-day conference will bring public and private international lawyers together with political and legal philosophers to discuss the complex issues raised by property in outer space, including its relations to the notions of territory, jurisdiction and sovereignty, but also the international legal status of scientific research, data and samples. The discussions will be organized around three central issues: (i) the relations between property, jurisdiction and sovereignty, and their implications in outer space; (ii) the prospects of "commoning" in outer space, and of a distinct future international institution and regime to govern the common use of celestial resources as currently discussed by the United Nations' Committee on the Peaceful Use of Outer Space (COPUOS); and (iii) the public and common good of science, and its implications for a better distinction between scientific "exploration" and commercial "use", exploitation or appropriation of and by science in outer space.Participants/Speakers: Philippe Achilleas (University of Paris-Saclay); Michael Byers (University of British Columbia, Vancouver); Isabel Feichtner (University of Würzburg); Stephan Hobe (University of Cologne); Maria Manoli (University of Aberdeen); Michela Massimi (University of Edinburgh); Alex Mills (University College, London); Margaret Moore (Queen's University, Ontario); Yannick Radi (Catholic University of Louvain); Lukas Rass-Masson (University of Toulouse Capitole); Anna Stilz (University of Berkeley); Fabio Tronchetti (University of Northumbria); Jonathan B. Wiener (Duke University); Katrina M. Wyman (New York University).

Samantha BessonDroit international des institutionsCollège de FranceAnnée 2025-2026The "Province of All Mankind"? Property in Outer Space under Public and Private International Law & PhilosophyColloque - Stéphanie Ruphy : CommentPanel 3: The Relations between Scientific "Exploration" and Commercial "Exploitation" of Outer SpaceColloque organisé par la Pr Samantha Besson, chaire Droit international des institutions, les 25 et 26 septembre 2025PrésentationAs it is the case in other (marine or polar) "spaces" of international law usually defined negatively as areas beyond the (territorial) jurisdiction of States, a "non-appropriation" principle applies to the outer space (art. II 1967 Outer Space Treaty; art. 11(2-3) 1979 Moon Agreement). Despite later clarifications in the 1979 Moon Agreement, States still disagree, however, about both the material scope of the principle of non-appropriation (celestial bodies only, or both the bodies and their extracted resources) and its personal scope (public appropriation in the form of sovereign claims by States only, or both public and private appropriation). They also disagree about the implications of the second, more positive principle that was added in the Moon Agreement, i.e. that of "common heritage of mankind" (art. 11(1) Moon Agreement) and about the content of the further principle of "equitable access and sharing of benefits" (art. 11(7d) Moon Agreement) that applies to the common exploitation of celestial resources. In any case, due to the limited number of State ratifications (17 to date), the Moon Agreement is not considered as an expression of universally binding customary law. The same applies to the international regime for the common exploitation of the natural resources of celestial bodies foreseen by the agreement (art. 11(5-7) and 18 Moon Agreement).This disagreement is sharpened by the tension between those more recent principles, including non-appropriation through use, and the original principles of the international law of "areas beyond national jurisdiction", i.e. the principle of "freedom of exploration and use" (art. I(1) Outer Space Treaty) and its twin principle, i.e. the "freedom of scientific investigation" (art. I(3) Outer Space Treaty; art. 6(1) Moon Agreement). Those original principles have been left untouched by the new ones, indeed, and seem to accommodate free appropriation of resources through use, even if those freedoms have to be "carried out for the benefit and in the interests of all countries" (art. I(1) Outer Space Treaty; art. 4(1) Moon Agreement). The same tensions between the original principles and the subsequent ones also apply within other spaces of international law such as the high seas and deep seabed and have not been resolved by the 2023 Agreement on the Conservation and Sustainable Use of Marine Biological Diversity of Areas beyond National Jurisdiction.This indeterminacy has led certain States and regional organizations to adopt domestic (public and private) legislation, develop soft law and/or conclude bilateral agreements to secure the property rights and investments of private companies authorized by those States to explore and exploit celestial bodies and their resources. Their hope thereby is to shape what is called, in international treaty law, a "subsequent practice in the application of treaties establishing an agreement". If those States were to succeed, that practice could influence the interpretation of the Outer Space Treaty. After all, this is exactly what some States did in 1982 after the adoption of the Convention of the Law on the Sea and following their disagreements about the organization of the international regime for the common exploitation of the deep seabed resources in the convention. So-doing, they steered that regime towards the 1994 compromise and the modification of the convention that ensued and, arguably, led to that regime's contemporary deadlock.This situation raises numerous questions about the kind of international law of outer space the international community of peoples should aim at developing. This is especially the case if we are to prevent the "enclosure" through public and private appropriation of what art. I(1) Outer Space Treaty refers to as the "province of all mankind". It also raises difficult questions about the state of our legal imaginary at a turning point of life on Earth. Are our legal categories themselves at risk of being prematurely "enclosed" by the binary opposition between (State) territory and space, by the opposition between the "common" and the public or the private, and by a given articulation of property to sovereignty?This two-day conference will bring public and private international lawyers together with political and legal philosophers to discuss the complex issues raised by property in outer space, including its relations to the notions of territory, jurisdiction and sovereignty, but also the international legal status of scientific research, data and samples. The discussions will be organized around three central issues: (i) the relations between property, jurisdiction and sovereignty, and their implications in outer space; (ii) the prospects of "commoning" in outer space, and of a distinct future international institution and regime to govern the common use of celestial resources as currently discussed by the United Nations' Committee on the Peaceful Use of Outer Space (COPUOS); and (iii) the public and common good of science, and its implications for a better distinction between scientific "exploration" and commercial "use", exploitation or appropriation of and by science in outer space.Participants/Speakers: Philippe Achilleas (University of Paris-Saclay); Michael Byers (University of British Columbia, Vancouver); Isabel Feichtner (University of Würzburg); Stephan Hobe (University of Cologne); Maria Manoli (University of Aberdeen); Michela Massimi (University of Edinburgh); Alex Mills (University College, London); Margaret Moore (Queen's University, Ontario); Yannick Radi (Catholic University of Louvain); Lukas Rass-Masson (University of Toulouse Capitole); Anna Stilz (University of Berkeley); Fabio Tronchetti (University of Northumbria); Jonathan B. Wiener (Duke University); Katrina M. Wyman (New York University).

Samantha BessonDroit international des institutionsCollège de FranceAnnée 2025-2026The "Province of All Mankind"? Property in Outer Space under Public and Private International Law & PhilosophyColloque - Margaret Moore : Exploration and Exploitation: Territorial Rights in Outer SpacePanel 3: The Relations between Scientific "Exploration" and Commercial "Exploitation" of Outer SpaceColloque organisé par la Pr Samantha Besson, chaire Droit international des institutions, les 25 et 26 septembre 2025PrésentationAs it is the case in other (marine or polar) "spaces" of international law usually defined negatively as areas beyond the (territorial) jurisdiction of States, a "non-appropriation" principle applies to the outer space (art. II 1967 Outer Space Treaty; art. 11(2-3) 1979 Moon Agreement). Despite later clarifications in the 1979 Moon Agreement, States still disagree, however, about both the material scope of the principle of non-appropriation (celestial bodies only, or both the bodies and their extracted resources) and its personal scope (public appropriation in the form of sovereign claims by States only, or both public and private appropriation). They also disagree about the implications of the second, more positive principle that was added in the Moon Agreement, i.e. that of "common heritage of mankind" (art. 11(1) Moon Agreement) and about the content of the further principle of "equitable access and sharing of benefits" (art. 11(7d) Moon Agreement) that applies to the common exploitation of celestial resources. In any case, due to the limited number of State ratifications (17 to date), the Moon Agreement is not considered as an expression of universally binding customary law. The same applies to the international regime for the common exploitation of the natural resources of celestial bodies foreseen by the agreement (art. 11(5-7) and 18 Moon Agreement).This disagreement is sharpened by the tension between those more recent principles, including non-appropriation through use, and the original principles of the international law of "areas beyond national jurisdiction", i.e. the principle of "freedom of exploration and use" (art. I(1) Outer Space Treaty) and its twin principle, i.e. the "freedom of scientific investigation" (art. I(3) Outer Space Treaty; art. 6(1) Moon Agreement). Those original principles have been left untouched by the new ones, indeed, and seem to accommodate free appropriation of resources through use, even if those freedoms have to be "carried out for the benefit and in the interests of all countries" (art. I(1) Outer Space Treaty; art. 4(1) Moon Agreement). The same tensions between the original principles and the subsequent ones also apply within other spaces of international law such as the high seas and deep seabed and have not been resolved by the 2023 Agreement on the Conservation and Sustainable Use of Marine Biological Diversity of Areas beyond National Jurisdiction.This indeterminacy has led certain States and regional organizations to adopt domestic (public and private) legislation, develop soft law and/or conclude bilateral agreements to secure the property rights and investments of private companies authorized by those States to explore and exploit celestial bodies and their resources. Their hope thereby is to shape what is called, in international treaty law, a "subsequent practice in the application of treaties establishing an agreement". If those States were to succeed, that practice could influence the interpretation of the Outer Space Treaty. After all, this is exactly what some States did in 1982 after the adoption of the Convention of the Law on the Sea and following their disagreements about the organization of the international regime for the common exploitation of the deep seabed resources in the convention. So-doing, they steered that regime towards the 1994 compromise and the modification of the convention that ensued and, arguably, led to that regime's contemporary deadlock.This situation raises numerous questions about the kind of international law of outer space the international community of peoples should aim at developing. This is especially the case if we are to prevent the "enclosure" through public and private appropriation of what art. I(1) Outer Space Treaty refers to as the "province of all mankind". It also raises difficult questions about the state of our legal imaginary at a turning point of life on Earth. Are our legal categories themselves at risk of being prematurely "enclosed" by the binary opposition between (State) territory and space, by the opposition between the "common" and the public or the private, and by a given articulation of property to sovereignty?This two-day conference will bring public and private international lawyers together with political and legal philosophers to discuss the complex issues raised by property in outer space, including its relations to the notions of territory, jurisdiction and sovereignty, but also the international legal status of scientific research, data and samples. The discussions will be organized around three central issues: (i) the relations between property, jurisdiction and sovereignty, and their implications in outer space; (ii) the prospects of "commoning" in outer space, and of a distinct future international institution and regime to govern the common use of celestial resources as currently discussed by the United Nations' Committee on the Peaceful Use of Outer Space (COPUOS); and (iii) the public and common good of science, and its implications for a better distinction between scientific "exploration" and commercial "use", exploitation or appropriation of and by science in outer space.Participants/Speakers: Philippe Achilleas (University of Paris-Saclay); Michael Byers (University of British Columbia, Vancouver); Isabel Feichtner (University of Würzburg); Stephan Hobe (University of Cologne); Maria Manoli (University of Aberdeen); Michela Massimi (University of Edinburgh); Alex Mills (University College, London); Margaret Moore (Queen's University, Ontario); Yannick Radi (Catholic University of Louvain); Lukas Rass-Masson (University of Toulouse Capitole); Anna Stilz (University of Berkeley); Fabio Tronchetti (University of Northumbria); Jonathan B. Wiener (Duke University); Katrina M. Wyman (New York University).

Samantha BessonDroit international des institutionsCollège de FranceAnnée 2025-2026The "Province of All Mankind"? Property in Outer Space under Public and Private International Law & PhilosophyColloque - Jonathan B. Wiener : Space as Province, Property, and Planetary Protection: Risk and the Rise of the InterplanetaryPanel 3: The Relations between Scientific "Exploration" and Commercial "Exploitation" of Outer SpaceColloque organisé par la Pr Samantha Besson, chaire Droit international des institutions, les 25 et 26 septembre 2025PrésentationAs it is the case in other (marine or polar) "spaces" of international law usually defined negatively as areas beyond the (territorial) jurisdiction of States, a "non-appropriation" principle applies to the outer space (art. II 1967 Outer Space Treaty; art. 11(2-3) 1979 Moon Agreement). Despite later clarifications in the 1979 Moon Agreement, States still disagree, however, about both the material scope of the principle of non-appropriation (celestial bodies only, or both the bodies and their extracted resources) and its personal scope (public appropriation in the form of sovereign claims by States only, or both public and private appropriation). They also disagree about the implications of the second, more positive principle that was added in the Moon Agreement, i.e. that of "common heritage of mankind" (art. 11(1) Moon Agreement) and about the content of the further principle of "equitable access and sharing of benefits" (art. 11(7d) Moon Agreement) that applies to the common exploitation of celestial resources. In any case, due to the limited number of State ratifications (17 to date), the Moon Agreement is not considered as an expression of universally binding customary law. The same applies to the international regime for the common exploitation of the natural resources of celestial bodies foreseen by the agreement (art. 11(5-7) and 18 Moon Agreement).This disagreement is sharpened by the tension between those more recent principles, including non-appropriation through use, and the original principles of the international law of "areas beyond national jurisdiction", i.e. the principle of "freedom of exploration and use" (art. I(1) Outer Space Treaty) and its twin principle, i.e. the "freedom of scientific investigation" (art. I(3) Outer Space Treaty; art. 6(1) Moon Agreement). Those original principles have been left untouched by the new ones, indeed, and seem to accommodate free appropriation of resources through use, even if those freedoms have to be "carried out for the benefit and in the interests of all countries" (art. I(1) Outer Space Treaty; art. 4(1) Moon Agreement). The same tensions between the original principles and the subsequent ones also apply within other spaces of international law such as the high seas and deep seabed and have not been resolved by the 2023 Agreement on the Conservation and Sustainable Use of Marine Biological Diversity of Areas beyond National Jurisdiction.This indeterminacy has led certain States and regional organizations to adopt domestic (public and private) legislation, develop soft law and/or conclude bilateral agreements to secure the property rights and investments of private companies authorized by those States to explore and exploit celestial bodies and their resources. Their hope thereby is to shape what is called, in international treaty law, a "subsequent practice in the application of treaties establishing an agreement". If those States were to succeed, that practice could influence the interpretation of the Outer Space Treaty. After all, this is exactly what some States did in 1982 after the adoption of the Convention of the Law on the Sea and following their disagreements about the organization of the international regime for the common exploitation of the deep seabed resources in the convention. So-doing, they steered that regime towards the 1994 compromise and the modification of the convention that ensued and, arguably, led to that regime's contemporary deadlock.This situation raises numerous questions about the kind of international law of outer space the international community of peoples should aim at developing. This is especially the case if we are to prevent the "enclosure" through public and private appropriation of what art. I(1) Outer Space Treaty refers to as the "province of all mankind". It also raises difficult questions about the state of our legal imaginary at a turning point of life on Earth. Are our legal categories themselves at risk of being prematurely "enclosed" by the binary opposition between (State) territory and space, by the opposition between the "common" and the public or the private, and by a given articulation of property to sovereignty?This two-day conference will bring public and private international lawyers together with political and legal philosophers to discuss the complex issues raised by property in outer space, including its relations to the notions of territory, jurisdiction and sovereignty, but also the international legal status of scientific research, data and samples. The discussions will be organized around three central issues: (i) the relations between property, jurisdiction and sovereignty, and their implications in outer space; (ii) the prospects of "commoning" in outer space, and of a distinct future international institution and regime to govern the common use of celestial resources as currently discussed by the United Nations' Committee on the Peaceful Use of Outer Space (COPUOS); and (iii) the public and common good of science, and its implications for a better distinction between scientific "exploration" and commercial "use", exploitation or appropriation of and by science in outer space.Participants/Speakers: Philippe Achilleas (University of Paris-Saclay); Michael Byers (University of British Columbia, Vancouver); Isabel Feichtner (University of Würzburg); Stephan Hobe (University of Cologne); Maria Manoli (University of Aberdeen); Michela Massimi (University of Edinburgh); Alex Mills (University College, London); Margaret Moore (Queen's University, Ontario); Yannick Radi (Catholic University of Louvain); Lukas Rass-Masson (University of Toulouse Capitole); Anna Stilz (University of Berkeley); Fabio Tronchetti (University of Northumbria); Jonathan B. Wiener (Duke University); Katrina M. Wyman (New York University).

Samantha BessonDroit international des institutionsCollège de FranceAnnée 2025-2026The "Province of All Mankind"? Property in Outer Space under Public and Private International Law & PhilosophyColloque - Yannick Radi : General Conclusions Panel 4: General Conclusions and DiscussionColloque organisé par la Pr Samantha Besson, chaire Droit international des institutions, les 25 et 26 septembre 2025PrésentationAs it is the case in other (marine or polar) "spaces" of international law usually defined negatively as areas beyond the (territorial) jurisdiction of States, a "non-appropriation" principle applies to the outer space (art. II 1967 Outer Space Treaty; art. 11(2-3) 1979 Moon Agreement). Despite later clarifications in the 1979 Moon Agreement, States still disagree, however, about both the material scope of the principle of non-appropriation (celestial bodies only, or both the bodies and their extracted resources) and its personal scope (public appropriation in the form of sovereign claims by States only, or both public and private appropriation). They also disagree about the implications of the second, more positive principle that was added in the Moon Agreement, i.e. that of "common heritage of mankind" (art. 11(1) Moon Agreement) and about the content of the further principle of "equitable access and sharing of benefits" (art. 11(7d) Moon Agreement) that applies to the common exploitation of celestial resources. In any case, due to the limited number of State ratifications (17 to date), the Moon Agreement is not considered as an expression of universally binding customary law. The same applies to the international regime for the common exploitation of the natural resources of celestial bodies foreseen by the agreement (art. 11(5-7) and 18 Moon Agreement).This disagreement is sharpened by the tension between those more recent principles, including non-appropriation through use, and the original principles of the international law of "areas beyond national jurisdiction", i.e. the principle of "freedom of exploration and use" (art. I(1) Outer Space Treaty) and its twin principle, i.e. the "freedom of scientific investigation" (art. I(3) Outer Space Treaty; art. 6(1) Moon Agreement). Those original principles have been left untouched by the new ones, indeed, and seem to accommodate free appropriation of resources through use, even if those freedoms have to be "carried out for the benefit and in the interests of all countries" (art. I(1) Outer Space Treaty; art. 4(1) Moon Agreement). The same tensions between the original principles and the subsequent ones also apply within other spaces of international law such as the high seas and deep seabed and have not been resolved by the 2023 Agreement on the Conservation and Sustainable Use of Marine Biological Diversity of Areas beyond National Jurisdiction.This indeterminacy has led certain States and regional organizations to adopt domestic (public and private) legislation, develop soft law and/or conclude bilateral agreements to secure the property rights and investments of private companies authorized by those States to explore and exploit celestial bodies and their resources. Their hope thereby is to shape what is called, in international treaty law, a "subsequent practice in the application of treaties establishing an agreement". If those States were to succeed, that practice could influence the interpretation of the Outer Space Treaty. After all, this is exactly what some States did in 1982 after the adoption of the Convention of the Law on the Sea and following their disagreements about the organization of the international regime for the common exploitation of the deep seabed resources in the convention. So-doing, they steered that regime towards the 1994 compromise and the modification of the convention that ensued and, arguably, led to that regime's contemporary deadlock.This situation raises numerous questions about the kind of international law of outer space the international community of peoples should aim at developing. This is especially the case if we are to prevent the "enclosure" through public and private appropriation of what art. I(1) Outer Space Treaty refers to as the "province of all mankind". It also raises difficult questions about the state of our legal imaginary at a turning point of life on Earth. Are our legal categories themselves at risk of being prematurely "enclosed" by the binary opposition between (State) territory and space, by the opposition between the "common" and the public or the private, and by a given articulation of property to sovereignty?This two-day conference will bring public and private international lawyers together with political and legal philosophers to discuss the complex issues raised by property in outer space, including its relations to the notions of territory, jurisdiction and sovereignty, but also the international legal status of scientific research, data and samples. The discussions will be organized around three central issues: (i) the relations between property, jurisdiction and sovereignty, and their implications in outer space; (ii) the prospects of "commoning" in outer space, and of a distinct future international institution and regime to govern the common use of celestial resources as currently discussed by the United Nations' Committee on the Peaceful Use of Outer Space (COPUOS); and (iii) the public and common good of science, and its implications for a better distinction between scientific "exploration" and commercial "use", exploitation or appropriation of and by science in outer space.Participants/Speakers: Philippe Achilleas (University of Paris-Saclay); Michael Byers (University of British Columbia, Vancouver); Isabel Feichtner (University of Würzburg); Stephan Hobe (University of Cologne); Maria Manoli (University of Aberdeen); Michela Massimi (University of Edinburgh); Alex Mills (University College, London); Margaret Moore (Queen's University, Ontario); Yannick Radi (Catholic University of Louvain); Lukas Rass-Masson (University of Toulouse Capitole); Anna Stilz (University of Berkeley); Fabio Tronchetti (University of Northumbria); Jonathan B. Wiener (Duke University); Katrina M. Wyman (New York University).

Samantha BessonDroit international des institutionsCollège de FranceAnnée 2025-2026The "Province of All Mankind"? Property in Outer Space under Public and Private International Law & PhilosophyColloque - Katia Coutant, Alban Guyomarc'h & Yann Robert : General Discussion, introduced and chaired by Young ResearchersPanel 4: General Conclusions and DiscussionColloque organisé par la Pr Samantha Besson, chaire Droit international des institutions, les 25 et 26 septembre 2025PrésentationAs it is the case in other (marine or polar) "spaces" of international law usually defined negatively as areas beyond the (territorial) jurisdiction of States, a "non-appropriation" principle applies to the outer space (art. II 1967 Outer Space Treaty; art. 11(2-3) 1979 Moon Agreement). Despite later clarifications in the 1979 Moon Agreement, States still disagree, however, about both the material scope of the principle of non-appropriation (celestial bodies only, or both the bodies and their extracted resources) and its personal scope (public appropriation in the form of sovereign claims by States only, or both public and private appropriation). They also disagree about the implications of the second, more positive principle that was added in the Moon Agreement, i.e. that of "common heritage of mankind" (art. 11(1) Moon Agreement) and about the content of the further principle of "equitable access and sharing of benefits" (art. 11(7d) Moon Agreement) that applies to the common exploitation of celestial resources. In any case, due to the limited number of State ratifications (17 to date), the Moon Agreement is not considered as an expression of universally binding customary law. The same applies to the international regime for the common exploitation of the natural resources of celestial bodies foreseen by the agreement (art. 11(5-7) and 18 Moon Agreement).This disagreement is sharpened by the tension between those more recent principles, including non-appropriation through use, and the original principles of the international law of "areas beyond national jurisdiction", i.e. the principle of "freedom of exploration and use" (art. I(1) Outer Space Treaty) and its twin principle, i.e. the "freedom of scientific investigation" (art. I(3) Outer Space Treaty; art. 6(1) Moon Agreement). Those original principles have been left untouched by the new ones, indeed, and seem to accommodate free appropriation of resources through use, even if those freedoms have to be "carried out for the benefit and in the interests of all countries" (art. I(1) Outer Space Treaty; art. 4(1) Moon Agreement). The same tensions between the original principles and the subsequent ones also apply within other spaces of international law such as the high seas and deep seabed and have not been resolved by the 2023 Agreement on the Conservation and Sustainable Use of Marine Biological Diversity of Areas beyond National Jurisdiction.This indeterminacy has led certain States and regional organizations to adopt domestic (public and private) legislation, develop soft law and/or conclude bilateral agreements to secure the property rights and investments of private companies authorized by those States to explore and exploit celestial bodies and their resources. Their hope thereby is to shape what is called, in international treaty law, a "subsequent practice in the application of treaties establishing an agreement". If those States were to succeed, that practice could influence the interpretation of the Outer Space Treaty. After all, this is exactly what some States did in 1982 after the adoption of the Convention of the Law on the Sea and following their disagreements about the organization of the international regime for the common exploitation of the deep seabed resources in the convention. So-doing, they steered that regime towards the 1994 compromise and the modification of the convention that ensued and, arguably, led to that regime's contemporary deadlock.This situation raises numerous questions about the kind of international law of outer space the international community of peoples should aim at developing. This is especially the case if we are to prevent the "enclosure" through public and private appropriation of what art. I(1) Outer Space Treaty refers to as the "province of all mankind". It also raises difficult questions about the state of our legal imaginary at a turning point of life on Earth. Are our legal categories themselves at risk of being prematurely "enclosed" by the binary opposition between (State) territory and space, by the opposition between the "common" and the public or the private, and by a given articulation of property to sovereignty?This two-day conference will bring public and private international lawyers together with political and legal philosophers to discuss the complex issues raised by property in outer space, including its relations to the notions of territory, jurisdiction and sovereignty, but also the international legal status of scientific research, data and samples. The discussions will be organized around three central issues: (i) the relations between property, jurisdiction and sovereignty, and their implications in outer space; (ii) the prospects of "commoning" in outer space, and of a distinct future international institution and regime to govern the common use of celestial resources as currently discussed by the United Nations' Committee on the Peaceful Use of Outer Space (COPUOS); and (iii) the public and common good of science, and its implications for a better distinction between scientific "exploration" and commercial "use", exploitation or appropriation of and by science in outer space.Participants/Speakers: Philippe Achilleas (University of Paris-Saclay); Michael Byers (University of British Columbia, Vancouver); Isabel Feichtner (University of Würzburg); Stephan Hobe (University of Cologne); Maria Manoli (University of Aberdeen); Michela Massimi (University of Edinburgh); Alex Mills (University College, London); Margaret Moore (Queen's University, Ontario); Yannick Radi (Catholic University of Louvain); Lukas Rass-Masson (University of Toulouse Capitole); Anna Stilz (University of Berkeley); Fabio Tronchetti (University of Northumbria); Jonathan B. Wiener (Duke University); Katrina M. Wyman (New York University).

Chroniqueurs : - Eliot Deval, journaliste - Gauthier le Bret, journaliste - Elisabeth Assayag, animatrice de télévision Vous voulez réagir ? Appelez-le 01.80.20.39.21 (numéro non surtaxé) ou rendez-vous sur les réseaux sociaux d'Europe 1 pour livrer votre opinion et débattre sur grandes thématiques développées dans l'émission du jour.Hébergé par Audiomeans. Visitez audiomeans.fr/politique-de-confidentialite pour plus d'informations.

Coucou, ce mois-ci je vous propose de découvrir d'autres podcasts engagés qui abordent également la question du spécisme.Et aujourd'hui, je vous parle d'Éthique et Psycho, le podcast animé par Yohann Hoarau qui analyse les oppressions, notamment par le biais de la psychologie sociale, mais aussi avec d'autres disciplines comme la sociologie, les sciences politiques, l'histoire, etc.C'est vraiment une ressource de qualité, avec beaucoup d'attention et de soin à la précision et à robustesse des positions présentées à chaque fois, et qui fait le tour de questions assez transversales, notamment le spécisme mais aussi beaucoup d'autres questions sociales importantes. Je vous recommande chaudement le double épisode avec Jérôme Segal sur la situation israélo-palestinienne qui fait vraiment bien le point sur les facteurs historiques et contemporains pour éclairer en partie ce qui a mené à la situation présente catastrophique du génocide en cours. Il y a aussi un épisode que j'ai adoré avec Sarah Zanaz sur le spécisme pensé comme un système sociale, c'est extrêmement quali : il faut à tout prix l'écouter ! Dans sa thèse, Sarah définit le spécisme comme une oppression et ça change de la définition très individualisante qui était jusqu'à maintenant donnée en philosophie. Mais bon, aujourd'hui je me suis dis que je vous diffuserais un épisode plus court, un des derniers publiés sur le podcast de Yohann qui était présent comme moi à un colloque universitaire très enrichissant à Rennes en juin dernier, et qui a eu la bonne idée de faire des courtes interviews avec plusieurs intervenant-es pour garder une trace des idées brassées, et montrer ce qui se fait de mieux dans la recherche contemporaine sur la question animale. Voilà pensez bien à vous abonner à Éthique et psycho, à suivre les futurs épisodes qui seront assurément passionnants, et bonne écoute !___________________________________Série de courtes interviews réalisées lors du colloques universitaires de Rennes sur la libération animale du 4 et 5 juin 2025.Lien vers les 3 interviews en anglais :    • Colloque antispéciste de Rennes - Intervie...  Merci à Takara et Laurent Tissot pour leur doublage !Me soutenir sur Ko-fi ou Tipeee :https://ko-fi.com/mangayohhttps://fr.tipeee.com/yohann-hoarau-e...00:00 Intro03:30 Sarah Zanaz05:38 Mathis Poupelin08:45 Nolwenn Veillard12:18 Nicolas Poirel15:27 Eloïse Ly Van Tu17:49 Tom Bry-Chevalier23:14 Émilie Dardenne25:55 Jules Braly-Nova28:27 Matti Wilks31:48 Bob Fisher35:22 Oscar Horta