kerekh 1-2. Maʼamarim rishon ṿe-sheni -- kerekh 3-4. Maʼamarim shelishi u-reviʻi -- kerekh 5. Maʼamar ḥamishi u-firḳe mavo.

El presente texto se interroga sobre los efectos performativos del himno de Chile en cuanto éste designa al país en la forma de una "copia feliz del Edén". A partir de ahí, se pregunta ¿cómo podría una copia afirmarse en la originalidad de una soberanía? Para solucionar la distancia entre copia y original y, por tanto, dar lugar al funcionamiento de la soberanía, el himno designa a esa copia como "feliz". El término "feliz" se constituye, así, en el operador que (...) vendría tanto a apuntalar a la constitución de una soberanía como a revelar el límite de su imposibilidad. "Feliz" permite disminuir la distancia entre copia y original, pero a la vez, la conserva irremediablemente. Por eso, decir que el país es la copia "feliz" es lo mismo que decir "infeliz" toda vez que ambos términos no hacen más que corroborar la diferencia ontológica entre copia y original. Se argumenta que el término "feliz" constituye un dispositivo teológico político, toda vez que replica la función angélica destinada a la administración de la creación divina. En estos términos se pregunta: ¿no será el proyecto de la República de Chile un proyecto esencialmente administrativo? A esta luz, el texto plantea la contraposición entre himno con el poema: el himno -se plantea- constituye el operador angélico que hace posible la articulación de una soberanía. El poema, en cambio, constituiría el resto irreductible que le resiste. This essay asks on the performative efects of the chilean hymn, because it names the country as a "happy copy of Eden". Since this problem, the essay asks: how could the copy may posits as the originality of the sovereignity? To solve the distance between the copy and the original and make posible the sovereignity´s operation, the hymn names the copy as "happy". The word "happy" supports the constitution of the sovereignity and reveals the limit of its own imposibility. "Happy" reduce the distance between the copy and the original but, at the same time, absolutely preserve it. That´s why, say that the country is the "happy" copy is the same than to say that is a "unhappy" one, because both words shows the ontological difference between the copy and the original. This essay argues that the word "happy" is a political theological device because repeats the angelical task of manage the divine creation. In theses terms we ask: ¿Is the chilean republican proyect an administrative one? In this light, the essay posits an aporia between the hymn and poem: the hymn constitutes the angelical operator that makes sovereignity posible, the poem constitutes a singular rest that resist it. (shrink)

El presente texto problematiza el llamado “fe-minismo musulmán” contemporáneo a la luz de la crítica averroísta a la teología política desarrollada por el filósofo cordobés en el Fasl Al Maqal (“Tratado Decisivo”) argumentando que el ejercicio crítico de las teóricas feministas musulmanas actuales reedita la iytihad o “es-fuerzo personal de interpretación” de los textos (con independencia de su tradición), operación presente en la tradición jurídica que, en su momento, Averroes extrapolará a la práctica filosófica. Para ello se analizará el razonamien-to (...) de algunas críticas feministas musulmanas para mostrar su semejanza con la crítica ave-rroísta desarrollada en el siglo XII. (shrink)

Basado en los trabajos del filósofo italiano G. Agamben, el presente ensayo argumenta que la figura del prudente en Aristóteles constituiría el lugar de la soberanía y, en cuanto tal, tendría un carácter estrictamente biopolítico pues, permite “producir” la humanidad del ser vivo hombre, en cuanto zoon politikón (zoon lógon ekhon). Así, el presente texto da cuenta de una aporía inscrita en el seno de la política occidental y su concepto de justicia que, encarnado en la figura aristotélica del prudente (...) –en cuanto lugar de la decisión soberana- ha de producir la propia “humanidad” del ser vivo hombre, separando, al mismo tiempo, algo así como una nuda vida. (shrink)

El presente artículo problematiza la cuestión de la “masa” a propósito de su irrupción en el contexto chileno del 18 de octubre del 2019, situando el límite que tiene el tratamiento que hace Sigmund Freud para pensarla y atender tanto la dinámica del deseo como su deriva destituyente respecto de las instituciones que, como se sabe, se articulan en función de la noción de “ilusión”.

El presente ensayo se propone dilucidar el modo en que el problema de la soberania tiene lugar en el pensamiento de Michel Foucault. Su tesis es que la soberanía aparece de tres formas a lo largo de su obra: en primer lugar, bajo la rúbrica de la “soberanía jurídica” propia del “modelo del Leviatán”, en segundo lugar, en la forma de una “soberania política” que se despliega en la época de la gubernamentalidad neoliberal y, en tercer lugar, la “vida soberana” (...) que constituye un lugar para articular una genealogía de la vida ética en Occidente. Esta última forma de situar la soberanía representa un intento, por parte de Foucault, de pensar en una noción de la Ilustración en la forma de una “actitud” más allá de cualquier época histórica. (shrink)

James Tully is one of the world’s most influential political philosophers at work today. Over the past thirty years – first with Strange Multiplicity (1995), and more fully with Public Philosophy in a New Key (2008) and On Global Citizenship (2014) – Tully has developed a distinctive approach to the study of political philosophy, democracy, and active citizenship for a deeply diverse world and a de-imperializing age. Civic Freedom in an Age of Diversity explores, elucidates, and questions Tully’s innovative approach, (...) methods, and concepts, providing both a critical assessment of Tully’s public philosophy and an exemplification of the dialogues of reciprocal elucidation that are central to Tully’s approach. Since the role of public philosophy is to address public affairs, the contributors consider public philosophy in the context of pressing issues and recent civic struggles such as: crises of democracy and citizenship in the Western world; global citizenship; civil disobedience and non-violence; Indigenous self-determination; nationalism and federalism in multinational states; protest movements in Turkey and Quebec; supranational belonging in the European Union; struggles over equity in academia; and environmental decontamination, decolonization, and cultural restoration in Akwesasne. Offering a wide-ranging analytical discussion of Tully’s work by leading scholars from various fields of study, with an extensive reply by Tully himself, Civic Freedom in an Age of Diversity provides a rich perspective on the full extent of his contribution. (shrink)

The importance of research on the notion of trust has grown considerably in the social sciences over the last three decades. Much has been said about the decline of political trust in democracies and intense debates have occurred about the nature and complexity of the relationship between trust and democracy. Political trust is usually understood as trust in political institutions, trust between citizens, and to a lesser extent, trust between groups. However, the literature on trust has given no special attention (...) to the issue of trust between minority and majority nations in multinational democracies – countries that are not only multicultural but also constitutional associations containing two or more nations or peoples whose members claim to be self-governing and have the right of self-determination. This volume, part of the work of the Groupe de recherche sur les sociétés plurinationales, is a comparative study of trust, distrust, and mistrust in multinational democracies, centring on Canada, Belgium, Spain, and the United Kingdom. Beliefs, attitudes, practices, and relations of trust, distrust, and mistrust are studied as situated, interacting, and coexisting phenomena that change over time and space. Contributors include Dario Castiglione, Jérôme Couture, Kris Deschouwer, Jean Leclair, Patti Tamara Lenard, Niels Morsink, Geneviève Nootens, Darren O’Toole, Alexandre Pelletier, Réjean Pelletier, Philip Resnick, David Robichaud, Peter Russell, Richard Simeon, Dave Sinardet, and Jeremy Webber. (shrink)

This book establishes a defence of human rights that can be shared by both non-religious and religious people.

This article explores Alan Gewirth’s argument for a secular foundation for the idea 2 of human rights as a possible response to Michael J. Perry’s claim “that the idea of 3 human rights is…ineliminably religious.” I examine Gewirth’s reasoning for constructing 3 a theory, namely that existing theories are fundamentally flawed and leave the idea of human rights without a logically consistent foundation, before considering in detail his claims for the Principle of Generic Consistency (PGC). Having looked at his critique (...) of numerous other theories, as well as at his own argument about human action grounding basic rights to freedom and well-being, I then offer a critique of Gewirth’s PGC. Ultimately my conclusion is that Gewrith's 3 theory relies too heavily on the notions, first that we have a meta-desire not to contradict ourselves and, second, that we are unable to find persuasive justifications for our behavior that might allow us to avoid self-contradiction. If one is not troubled by charges of self-contradiction or, as is more often the case, one does not recognize that one’s victim is as much a human being as oneself, Gewirth’s theory 5 V 3 will not seem particularly persuasive. *** DIRECT SUPPORT *** A28BB025 00003. (shrink)

Faced with charges of impiety and corruption of the youth, Socrates attempts a defence designed to vindicate the philosophic way of life. In this he seems to be successful, as Socrates is today highly regarded for his description of the good life and for his unwillingness to live any other sort of life, a position that is most obviously exemplified by his defence in the Apology. After his sentencing, Socrates’ arguments and actions—in the Crito and the Phaedo—also lend considerable support (...) to the idea that the philosopher is committed to living a particularly good sort of life. While the sequence of dialogues that culminates in Socrates’ execution might seem to be the most obviously critical of the life of the philosopher, these dialogues actually serve to enshrine the character of Socrates as the quintessential moral hero. (shrink)

The idea of heroism has become thoroughly muddled today. In contemporary society, any behavior that seems distinctly difficult or unusually impressive is classified as heroic: everyone from firefighters to foster fathers to freedom fighters are our heroes. But what motivates these people to act heroically and what prevents other people from being heroes? In our culture today, what makes one sort of hero appear more heroic than another sort? In order to answer these questions, Ari Kohen turns to classical (...) conceptions of the hero to explain the confusion and to highlight the ways in which distinct heroic categories can be useful at different times. Untangling Heroism argues for the existence of three categories of heroism that can be traced back to the earliest Western literature – the epic poetry of Homer and the dialogues of Plato – and that are complex enough to resonate with us and assist us in thinking about heroism today. Kohen carefully examines the Homeric heroes Achilles and Odysseus and Plato's Socrates, and then compares the three to each other. He makes clear how and why it is that the other-regarding hero, Socrates, supplanted the battlefield hero, Achilles, and the suffering hero, Odysseus. Finally, he explores in detail four cases of contemporary heroism that highlight Plato's success. Kohen states that in a post-Socratic world, we have chosen to place a premium on heroes who make other-regarding choices over self-interested ones. He argues that when humans face the fact of their mortality, they are able to think most clearly about the sort of life they want to have lived, and only in doing that does heroic action become a possibility. Kohen's careful analysis and rethinking of the heroism concept will be relevant to scholars across the disciplines of political science, philosophy, literature, and classics. (shrink)

Faced with charges of impiety and corruption of the youth, Socrates attempts a defence designed to vindicate the philosophic way of life. In this he seems to be successful, as Socrates is today highly regarded for his description of the good life and for his unwillingness to live any other sort of life, a position that is most obviously exemplified by his defence in the Apology. After his sentencing, Socrates' arguments and actions -- in the Crito and the Phaedo -- (...) also lend considerable support to the idea that the philosopher is committed to living a particularly good sort of life. While the sequence of dialogues that culminates in Socrates' execution might seem to be the most obviously critical of the life of the philosopher, these dialogues actually serve to enshrine the character of Socrates as the quintessential moral hero. (shrink)

At the center of this paper are three questions: in the absence of a religious worldview, can one gain access to the concepts of forgiveness and reconciliation, can reconciliation be achieved in the absence of forgiveness or does the former depend in some way upon the latter, and can we make sense of a restorative approach to justice in the absence of either forgiveness or reconciliation? To answer these questions, I look closely at the concept of forgiveness in the first (...) section of this article with the goals of disentangling it from its religious undertones and emphasizing its importance to the very concept of restorative justice. Drawing on both theoretical work and practical examples, I argue that forgiveness is not necessarily a religious concept ? contrary to common perception ? and that, contra Zehr, it is a foundational component of restorative justice. Having considered this first problem, I turn ? in the second section ? to a discussion of the concept of reconciliation, arguing that personal and political reconciliation must be separated from one another and from the concept of forgiveness. Ultimately, I conclude that forgiveness and reconciliation are quite different concepts, that the latter relies on the former, and that the latter is a goal rather than a necessary component of restorative justice. Drawing largely on the work of Hannah Arendt, Susan Dwyer, Trudy Govier, and Howard Zehr, as well as discussions with members of Murder Victims? Families for Reconciliation, I argue that political reconciliation between groups can be achieved in the absence of personal reconciliation between individual victims and perpetrators in those groups. Further, I demonstrate that restorative practices open up the possibility of both types of reconciliation, but that they are ultimately founded only on the principle of forgiveness. (shrink)