Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. De la identidad humana a las identidades sociopolíticas: el rol del pensamiento wittgensteiniano en un desplazamiento crucial.Miguel Ángel Quintana Paz - 2020 - Anales de la Cátedra Francisco Suárez 54:7-31.
    Today, the notion of identity is usually linked with ethical-political discussions like multiculturalism, gender or sexual diversity, recognition of plurality, etc. Nevertheless, the flourishing of this vision that interprets “identity” mainly in its plural form (as “identities”) contrasts sharply with the sense that “identity” has had during most of the history of philosophy (in which identity was understood in connection with “unity” or “selfsameness”, not with “diversity” or “otherness”). In order to explain the passage from one notion of identity to (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • The Confessing Animal in Foucault and Wittgenstein.Bob Plant - 2006 - Journal of Religious Ethics 34 (4):533-559.
    In "The History of Sexuality", Foucault maintains that "Western man has become a confessing animal" (1990, 59), thus implying that "man" was not always such a creature. On a related point, Wittgenstein suggests that "man is a ceremonial animal" (1996, 67); here the suggestion is that human beings are, by their very nature, ritualistically inclined. In this paper I examine this crucial difference in emphasis, first by reconstructing Foucault's "genealogy" of confession, and subsequently by exploring relevant facets of Wittgenstein's later (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • Religion, Relativism, and Wittgenstein’s Naturalism.Bob Plant - 2011 - International Journal of Philosophical Studies 19 (2):177-209.
    Wittgenstein’s remarks on religious and magical practices are often thought to harbour troubling fideistic and relativistic views. Unsurprisingly, commentators are generally resistant to the idea that religious belief constitutes a ‘language‐game’ governed by its own peculiar ‘rules’, and is thereby insulated from the critical assessment of non‐participants. Indeed, on this fideist‐relativist reading, it is unclear how mutual understanding between believers and non‐believers (even between different sorts of believers) would be possible. In this paper I do three things: (i) show why (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations