Philosophy & Social Criticism recent issues

Moral knowledge and mass crime: A critical reading of moral relativism

Dimitrijevic, N. — Thu, 04 Feb 2010 09:04:16 PST

In this article I ask how moral relativism applies to the analysis of responsibility for mass crime. The focus is on the critical reading of two influential relativist attempts to offer a theoretically consistent response to the challenges imposed by extreme criminal practices. First, I explore Gilbert Harman’s analytical effort to conceptualize the reach of moral discourse. According to Harman, mass crime creates a contextually specific relationship to which moral judgments do not apply any more. Second, I analyze the inability thesis, which claims that the agents of mass crime are not able to distinguish between right and wrong. Richard Arneson, Michael Zimmerman and Geoffrey Scarre do not deny the moral wrongness of crime. However, having introduced the claim of authenticity as a specific feature of the inability thesis, they maintain that killers are not responsible. I argue that these positions do not hold. The relativist failure to properly conceptualize responsibility for mass crime follows from the mistaken view of moral autonomy, which then leads to the erroneous explanation of the establishment, authority and justification of moral judgments.

From anti-liberal to untimely liberal: Leo Strauss' two critiques of liberalism

Schiff, J. — Thu, 04 Feb 2010 09:04:16 PST

Leo Strauss’ ubiquitous presence in recent US foreign policy debates demands a thorough analysis of his critique of liberalism. I identify and explain a previously unnoticed transformation in that critique. Strauss’ Weimar critique of liberalism was philosophical and political; like Carl Schmitt, he sought philosophical grounds to replace liberalism with an authoritarian political system. However, post-emigration Strauss abandoned this political agenda, exclusively pursuing a philosophical critique that exposed modern liberalism’s purported weaknesses in order to strengthen its core. I accentuate this change by reading Strauss’ postwar lecture, ‘The Three Waves of Modernity’, as an implicit response to and reconstruction of Schmitt’s ‘Neutralizations and Depoliticizations’ essay. Strauss’ changing relationship to political theology and political philosophy was central to his transformation: while a philosophically grounded political theology undergirded his early disdain for liberalism, Strauss later abandoned political theology for a quasi-theological faith in political philosophy that motivated his more moderate, philosophical critique.

Coping with constitutional indeterminacy: John Rawls and Jurgen Habermas

Hedrick, T. — Thu, 04 Feb 2010 09:04:16 PST

In this article, I argue that political philosophers like Rawls and Habermas that characterize their methods as non-metaphysical or postmetaphysical depend on constitutions in order to provide a positive and public reference point for democratic participants. Michelman shows how this dependency is problematic, by contending that disagreement about the meaning of constitutional rights and the indeterminacy of their application undermines the rationality of consensus. I argue that his concerns raise serious problems for Rawls’ theory. Habermas, on the other hand, has some tools to deal with Michelman’s critique — namely, his distinction between discourses of justification and application, and his idea of constitutional patriotism — but he must concede that much of the substance of constitutional democracy is basically up for grabs. I conclude by suggesting why these consequences are less threatening than they may seem.

The education of racial perception

Monahan, M. — Thu, 04 Feb 2010 09:04:16 PST

This article argues for the practice of the ‘education of racial perception’ as a critical component of any struggle against racial oppression (and for a liberated humanity generally). Taking the phenomenological ontology suggested by Linda Alcoff’s recent book Visible Identities, I argue that the project of educating our racial perception is a way to critically assess the way in which our perception of race both conditions and is conditioned by a racialized social world. By learning more about and ultimately challenging this relation we affirm our responsibility and agency in the face of an oppressive status quo.

'Potentia' as 'potestas': An interpretation of modern politics between Thomas Hobbes and Carl Schmitt

Altini, C. — Thu, 04 Feb 2010 09:04:16 PST

The present article discusses the relationship between might (potentia ) and power (potestas) as it has unfolded throughout the modern age, from Thomas Hobbes to Carl Schmitt. Hobbes indicates the way forward for a progressive linguistic and conceptual coincidence of potentia and potestas: the goal of Hobbesian political philosophy (the search for peace and security) necessitates the reduction of potentia to potestas through the elimination of the content of actus. Schmitt accepts this reduction, by assigning priority to potestas: the image of modern technology as a privileged dimension of potentia—potestas comes together as the modern state. Instead of taking the route of potentia understood as an opening-up to new possibilities and as human self-affirmation, the language of potentia—potestas has triggered a process, which is that of a naturalization of power relations, that is based on and justified by the social inequality arising from the differing extent of ownership of the instruments of technological production.

A reforming of international relations: D. Archibugi, The Global Commonwealth of Citizens (Princeton, NJ and Oxford: Princeton University Press, 2008), ISBN 978--0-691--13490--1

Caranti, L. — Thu, 04 Feb 2010 09:04:16 PST

Foreword

Ferrara, A. — Wed, 30 Dec 2009 03:19:46 PST

Ritual and sincerity: Certitude and the other

Seligman, A. B. — Wed, 30 Dec 2009 03:19:46 PST

In this article, I develop an understanding of ritual and of sincerity as two ideal-typical modes of framing human action. I focus on the dangers of what I term the sincere model because it is so strongly counter-intuitive to the way we usually understand the world, the moral imperatives of action and the framing of our intersubjective universe. I will begin, however, with some brief remarks on ritual — not as a discrete realm of human endeavor, usually identified with ‘religious’ ritual (though inclusive of religious ritual), but rather as a particular modality of understanding action that is essential to the constitution of both social and individual selves and without which a shared world would not be possible.

Mediating or merely juxtaposing ritual and sincerity?

Ferrara, A. — Wed, 30 Dec 2009 03:19:46 PST

Kinds of ritual and the place of transcendence

Rosati, M. — Wed, 30 Dec 2009 03:19:46 PST

Are 'ritual' and 'sincerity' really able to account for human communication and interaction?

Marzocchi, V. — Wed, 30 Dec 2009 03:19:46 PST

Ritual as compensation for human deficit and counterpart of a hyper-idealized image of inwardness

Griffero, T. — Wed, 30 Dec 2009 03:19:46 PST

Authenticity and commitment

Spini, D. — Wed, 30 Dec 2009 03:19:46 PST

Modernity, deritualization and freedom

Petrucciani, S. — Wed, 30 Dec 2009 03:19:46 PST

The 'public' role of religion as sincerity

Semplici, S. — Wed, 30 Dec 2009 03:19:46 PST

A reply to my critics

Seligman, A. B. — Wed, 30 Dec 2009 03:19:46 PST

Is Marx a Fichtean?

Rockmore, T. — Wed, 30 Dec 2009 03:19:46 PST

Review essay: Robert Fine, Cosmopolitanism (London and New York: Rout-ledge, 2007), 176 pp

Ahern, K. — Wed, 30 Dec 2009 03:19:46 PST

Review essay: An odd black solidarity, indeed: Tommie Shelby, We Who Are Dark: The Philosophical Foundations of Black Solidarity (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2005)

Tunstall, D. A. — Wed, 30 Dec 2009 03:19:46 PST

Books received 2008--2009

Wed, 30 Dec 2009 03:19:46 PST

1989 and the European Social Model: Transition without emancipation?

Azmanova, A. — Mon, 19 Oct 2009 04:22:49 PDT

The post-communist revolutions of 1989 triggered parallel transformation in the ideological landscape on both sides of the former Iron Curtain. The geo-political opening after the end of the Cold War made global integration a highly salient factor in political mobilization, opting out to replace the capital-versus-labor dynamics of conflict that had shaped the ideological families of Europe during the 20th century. This has resulted in splitting the traditional constituencies of the Left and the Right and reorganizing them along new fault-lines: those shaped by attitudes to globalization and EU enlargement (in the West) and by attitudes to EU accession and global economic competition (in the East). Thus, an ideational convergence between East and West is taking place in Europe, radically altering the structure of political competition in the early 21st century. As the new political cleavage cuts across, rather than runs along, the left—right ideological continuum, it is eroding the societal alliances that had supported the post-war European Social Model. The emerging structure of political competition enables substantive changes in the European Social Model in the direction of deepening labor commodification, thus defeating the emancipatory potential that earlier labor-market policies had contained.

What is wrong with agonistic pluralism?: Reflections on conflict in democratic theory

Erman, E. — Mon, 19 Oct 2009 04:22:49 PDT

During the last couple of decades, concurrently with an increased awareness of the complexity of ethical conflicts, political theorists have directed attention to how constitutional democracy should cope with a fact of incommensurable doctrines. Poststructuralists such as Chantal Mouffe claim that ethical conflicts are fundamentally irreconcilable, which is indeed a view shared by many liberal theorists. The question of whether ethical conflicts are in principle irreconcilable is an important one since the answer has implications for what democratic institutions are desirable. In light of this question the article investigates the notion of conflict in agonistic pluralism and discourse theory. At first glance, Mouffe’s agonism seems apt to accommodate ethical conflict in democratic governance, since it focuses on conflict as the core of politics, whereas Habermasian deliberative democracy seems inappropriate for this task, as it focuses on consensus. However, through an inquiry into the conditions of conflict this article will argue the opposite, namely, that conflict cannot be adequately understood within Mouffe’s agonistic framework. The thesis defended is (1) that discourse theory offers a more accurate account of conflict than agonistic theory because it embraces the idea that deliberation is constitutive of conflict, and (2) that some of Habermas’ assumptions concerning ethical discourse need to be revised in order for his democratic theory to fully accommodate this insight.

Ethics versus morality: A problematic divide

Harper, S. J. — Mon, 19 Oct 2009 04:22:49 PDT

I explicate the distinction between ethics and morality in terms of four central contrasts, and argue (1) that moral theories that embrace the implicit divide are both theoretically and practically problematic in their failure to meet certain widely accepted standards of theoretical coherence and in their resulting propensity to generate indeterminable conflicts among norms, and (2) that social roles represent one aspect of the moral life that cannot be understood in terms of this distinction. My suggestion will be that we ought to explore an interpretation of the moral realm according to which all moral attributes are relative to social roles, since a role-centered morality promises a way of overcoming this problematic divide.

On the circularity of democratic justice

Thompson, S. — Mon, 19 Oct 2009 04:22:49 PDT

In this article, I argue that justice and democracy stand in a circular relationship: just outcomes emerge from democratic deliberations, but only if such deliberations meet the standards of justice. I develop my argument by engaging in a critical dialogue with Nancy Fraser. Contending that she fails to deal with the danger that unfair deliberative procedures and inadequate norms of justice may reinforce one another, I show what a satisfactory account of democratic justice would look like. Going beyond Fraser’s theory, I maintain that although justice and democracy do form a circular relationship, it is essential to give the former greater weight than the latter. I finesse my account by showing what this differential weighting would entail in practice. The result is an account of democratic justice that is significantly different from and a marked improvement on that of Fraser.

Reason as danger and remedy for the modern subject in Hobbes' Leviathan

Sadler, G. B. — Mon, 19 Oct 2009 04:22:49 PDT

The article argues that Hobbes articulates a modern problematic of reason, where the shared rationality of human beings is an integral part of the danger they present to each other, and where reason suggests a solution, the social contract and the laws of nature, enforced and interpreted by absolute sovereign authority. This solution reflects a tension in modern reason itself, since it requires the alienation of self-determination of the rational human subject precisely to preserve the condition for the possibility of the rationality of the rational human subject, i.e. one’s life, which is threatened by the very rationality of other human subjects. I discuss interpretations of Hobbes which stress the other motives of conflict, i.e. competition and vanity, and acknowledge that they play a role in the threat subjects present to each other, but argue that the danger presented precisely by shared rationality, which I discuss with some reference to the Hegelian dialectic of consciousness and mutual recognition, has been underplayed by Hobbes’ interpretation.

Political liberalism and the good life: Fred Dallmayr, In Search of the Good Life: A Pedagogy for Troubled Times (Lexington: University of Kentucky Press, 2007)

Rasmussen, D. M. — Mon, 19 Oct 2009 04:22:49 PDT

Review of In Search of the Good Life

Flynn, B. — Mon, 19 Oct 2009 04:22:49 PDT

'Sehnsucht Dorthin': A response to Rasmussen and Flynn

Dallmayr, F. — Mon, 19 Oct 2009 04:22:49 PDT

In my response I take issue mainly with the conception of ‘political liberalism’, as defended by David Rasmussen, and of ‘civic republicanism’, as championed by Bernard Flynn. In opposition to the interest-based individualism of the former, and the state-centered conception of the latter, I support the perspective of an ethically sustained and pluralistic democracy, where democratic politics means the open-ended striving for the ‘good life’ of all people.

Badiou's ahistorical century: Alain Badiou, The Century, trans., with commentary and notes, Alberto Toscano (USA: Polity Press, 2007), 233 pp. + index

Bernstein, J. — Mon, 19 Oct 2009 04:22:49 PDT

This review essay explores Alain Badiou’s paradoxical attempt to give a philosophical account of the 20th century (in his text The Century ) which is not understood along the lines of history. As an example of Badiou’s project of ‘subtractive formalization’, The Century amounts to an essentially ahistorical treatment of a historical period.

Habermas and analytical Marxism

Heath, J. — Tue, 22 Sep 2009 09:03:59 PDT

John Roemer once described the ‘intellectual foundations’ of analytical Marxism as the recognition that, despite having a valid core, Marxism rested upon outdated social science. The solution, he believed, was to update the theory ‘using state-of-the-art methods of analytical philosophy and "positivist" social science’. If one takes this definition literally, Jürgen Habermas’ early work qualifies as that of an analytical Marxist. Yet although he developed his project in a way that was independent of the self-identified analytical Marxists, there are important points of convergence in their views. In particular, in their efforts to update Marxism, both Habermas and the analytical Marxists managed to talk themselves out of being Marxists in any recognizable sense of the term. This is a noteworthy outcome, given the differences in their points of departure. This article tracks the intellectual history of these two movements, in order to identify the tendencies that pushed this rather disparate group of theorists in the same direction.

Strangers and natives: Gadamer, colonial discourse and the politics of understanding

Coe, C. D. — Tue, 22 Sep 2009 09:03:59 PDT

I claim that the hermeneutic circle both describes and undermines the colonialist impulse, by mapping how our prejudices are projected out into reality but thus make themselves vulnerable to critical scrutiny. Gadamer’s attention to the way in which our prejudices should be challenged, his emphasis on the construction of the tradition that has such an influence on our understanding (and our tendency to ignore that malleability), and his resistance to the Enlightenment ideal of transcending the historical and natural given give us resources by which to critique the discourse of self and other that develops within colonialism.

Labour, exchange and recognition: Marx contra Honneth

Borman, D. A. — Tue, 22 Sep 2009 09:03:59 PDT

This article explores Marx’s contention that the achievement of full personhood and, not just consequently, but simultaneously, of genuine intersubjectivity depends upon the attainment of recognition for one’s place in the social division of labour, recognition which is systematically denied to some individuals and groups of individuals through the capitalist organization of production and exchange. This reading is then employed in a critique of Axel Honneth’s theory of recognition which, it is argued, cannot account for the systematic obstacles faced by some struggles for recognition.

Reasonable, agonistic, or good?: The character of a democrat

Fives, A. — Tue, 22 Sep 2009 09:03:59 PDT

Postmodernists reject what they call the universalist-rationalist framework of liberalism. When they do defend liberal democracy, they do so in a contextualist manner (within a ‘form of life’) and on the basis of contestation (‘agonism’). Liberals are right to charge postmodernism with self-contradiction, relativism, and immoralism. It is also argued in this article that liberalism and postmodernism are incompatible, and therefore, they cannot be joined together in response to the hegemonic construction of democratic debate. However, liberals are caught in a bind as they insist on impartiality but also believe the exercise of virtue (reasonableness, mutual respect) is a requirement of rational dialogue. This article argues that perfectionism (objectivism) in value judgements is required both to insist that virtuousity is a requirement of rationality and to reject postmodernism. However, it must be possible to separate perfectionism from two features of Alasdair MacIntyre’s Aristotelianism: he is hostile to liberal rights and his contextualism results in relativism.

The politics of imagination and the public role of religion

Bottici, C. — Tue, 22 Sep 2009 09:03:59 PDT

The aim of this article is to show that, in order to understand the new public role of religion, we need to rethink the nexus, often neglected by contemporary philosophy, between politics and imagination. The current resurrection of religion in the public sphere is linked to a deep transformation of political imagination which has its roots in the double process of the reduction of politics to mere administration, on the one hand, and to spectacle, on the other. In an epoch when politics is said to be simply a question of ‘good governance’, of good administration within a neo-liberal consensus, the paradox is that of a lack of political imagination which goes hand in hand with its hypertrophy through the media. This article tackles this paradox, by firstly discussing the nexus of politics, imagination and religion and, secondly, by analysing their contemporary transformations. In conclusion, the thesis is illustrated through the analysis of some contemporary examples.

Review essay: Whose poor are the global poor?: Thomas Pogge, World Poverty and Human Rights, 2nd edn (Cambridge: Polity Press, 2008)

Lafont, C. — Tue, 22 Sep 2009 09:03:59 PDT