Abstract

Mystery and Politics argues that mystery, as that which exceeds but must not exclude human knowledge, is crucial to a vibrant politics. Politics is born of and its substance is relationships: that of the self with the self, of the one with the many, and of the many with the world, to name but a few. These relationships are enabled by creation, "meaning" and engagement, all of which are infused with mystery. Thus to exclude mystery from politics is to exclude that which enables the relationships in which politics consists. ;However, modern liberalism has become wary of the power of mystery. Many horrific political catastrophes have been animated by the desire to realize a particular vision of mysterious human potential. As a result, many modern liberal thinkers strive to banish mystery from politics altogether. Ironically, the effort to render politics "safe" by excluding mystery generates its own dangers. The exclusion of mystery can foster political alienation as expressed through political apathy or fundamentalism. ;In Mystery and Politics I maintain an appreciation of liberalism's understandable wariness of mystery. I sketch out means of opening up politics to speech and practices that give voice to plural understandings of mystery, which can revitalize politics and ethics yet evade the dangers of any exclusive vision of mystery. In this effort, I engage the work of Judith Shklar, Hannah Arendt, Charles Taylor and Michel Foucault in three dimensions. First, I consider each thinker's understanding of mystery and the practices each nurtures that enhance and/or limit its power. Second, I examine the possibilities and dangers of each thinker's vision of mystery. Third, I explore the implications of each understanding of mystery for politics and ethics. Having demonstrated that essential to generating a dynamic politics and ethics is enhancing a political openness to a plurality of mysteries as opposed to embracing one particular understanding of mystery or excluding, I ask what kind of ethos and politics can be charted between these different visions of mystery if and when none, due to the very nature of mystery, can establish itself with certainty