Tijdschrift Voor Filosofie 77 (4):785-813 (2015)

In secondary literature one can often read that Arendt, when she writes about violence, differs from Benjamin and Sorel. Indeed, while she considers violence as something instrumental, the two others write about a kind of violence that does not serve a goal. In the present essay it is argued that this presentation of the debate is not correct, and that the relationship between the three philosophers regarding the issue of violence is more complex.
Keywords violence   means-end relationship   Hannah Arendt   Walter Benjamin   Georges Sorel
Categories No categories specified
(categorize this paper)
DOI 10.2143/TVF.77.4.3139384
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 68,916
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

On Politics and Violence: Arendt Contra Fanon.Elizabeth Frazer & Kimberly Hutchings - 2008 - Contemporary Political Theory 7 (1):90-108.
Violence and the Origins of Legislative Authority.David Allinson - 2009 - Emergent Australasian Philosophers 2 (1):1-16.
The Concept of Violence in the Work of Hannah Arendt.Annabel Herzog - 2017 - Continental Philosophy Review 50 (2):165-179.
Hannah Arendt's Reflections on Violence and Power.Richard J. Bernstein - 2011 - Iris. European Journal of Philosophy and Public Debate 3 (5):3-30.


Added to PP index

Total views
26 ( #436,160 of 2,497,981 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
2 ( #283,501 of 2,497,981 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes