Caroline New is an energetic activist who has interpolated critical realist ideas into the front-line of political activism. In this wide-ranging interview, she begins by reflecting on her life and how she became a realist and her account is illustrated with personal anecdotes recalling memories of well-known philosophers and activists from the time. She discusses how her position set her apart from other feminists and she examines the interacting threads of longstanding debates on the political left, as well as (...) longstanding debates within critical realist circles, such as the relative importance of quantitative methods in social research and the scope for agency as a source of intentional change. Finally she brings some of her ideas to bear on contemporary issues. This engaging interview notably provides some of the social context in which critical realism developed, while also pointing towards its future potential. (shrink)

Caroline New is an energetic activist who has interpolated critical realist ideas into the front-line of political activism. In this wide-ranging interview, she begins by reflecting on her life and how she became a realist and her account is illustrated with personal anecdotes recalling memories of well-known philosophers and activists from the time. She discusses how her position set her apart from other feminists and she examines the interacting threads of longstanding debates on the political left, as well as (...) longstanding debates within critical realist circles, such as the relative importance of quantitative methods in social research and the scope for agency as a source of intentional change. Finally she brings some of her ideas to bear on contemporary issues. This engaging interview notably provides some of the social context in which critical realism developed, while also pointing towards its future potential. (shrink)

Two years ago, a professor at the University of California, Herbert Marcuse, an American social philosopher with traditional German training, came to be regarded as the recognized theoretician of the "New Left" movement. Marcuse's popularity compelled many writers, including ourselves , to make a careful examination specifically of the theoretical content of that teaching, which laid claim to performing the role of a critical and revolutionary theory of society. The development of a critique of the philosophical and theoretical foundations (...) and the internal contradictions of Marcuse's teachings was thus dictated by a real situation, by the actual struggle of ideas, and has perhaps still not lost its significance. Another problem, which aroused the interest of researchers even then but which had not found an answer in our article because of its specific purpose, had to do with the relationship between Marcuse's philosophical concept and the spontaneous consciousness of the "mass" participants in the real protest movement that came to be known as the "New Left" movement. (shrink)

The New Left and the 1960s is the third volume of Herbert Marcuse's collected papers. In 1964, Marcuse published a major study of advanced industrial society, One Dimensional Man , which was an important influence on the young radicals who formed the New Left. Marcuse embodied many of the defining political impulses of the New Left in his thought and politics - hence a younger generation of political activists looked up to him for theoretical and political guidance. (...) The material collected in this volume provides a rich and deep grasp of the era and the role of Marcuse in the theoretical and political dramas of the day. This volume contains articles, letters, talks, and interviews including: "On the New Left," a transcription of the 1968 talk at the Guardian newspaper's twentieth anniversary; "Reflections on the French Revolution," which contains comments on the 1968 French student and worker uprising; "Liberation from the Affluent Society," which presents Marcuse's contribution to the 1967 Dialectics of Liberations conference; and "United States: Questions of Organization and the Revolutionary Subject," a conversation between Marcuse and the German writer Hans Magnus Enzenberger, published here in English for the first time. Edited by Douglas Kellner, this volume will be of interest to all those previously unfamiliar with Herbert Marcuse, generally acknowledged as a major figure in the intellectual and social mileux of the 1960s and 1970s, as well as to specialists, who will here have access to papers and articles collected in one volume for the first time. (shrink)

_The New Left and the 1960s _is the third volume of Herbert Marcuse's collected papers. In 1964, Marcuse published a major study of advanced industrial society, _One Dimensional Man_, which was an important influence on the young radicals who formed the New Left. Marcuse embodied many of the defining political impulses of the New Left in his thought and politics - hence a younger generation of political activists looked up to him for theoretical and political guidance. The (...) material collected in this volume provides a rich and deep grasp of the era and the role of Marcuse in the theoretical and political dramas of the day. This volume contains articles, letters, talks, and interviews including: "On the New Left," a transcription of the 1968 talk at the Guardian newspaper's twentieth anniversary; "Reflections on the French Revolution," which contains comments on the 1968 French student and worker uprising; "Liberation from the Affluent Society," which presents Marcuse's contribution to the 1967 Dialectics of Liberations conference; and "United States: Questions of Organization and the Revolutionary Subject," a conversation between Marcuse and the German writer Hans Magnus Enzenberger, published here in English for the first time. Edited by Douglas Kellner, this volume will be of interest to all those previously unfamiliar with Herbert Marcuse, generally acknowledged as a major figure in the intellectual and social mileux of the 1960s and 1970s, as well as to specialists, who will here have access to papers and articles collected in one volume for the first time. (shrink)

_Confronting American Labor_ traces the development of the American left, from the Depression era through the Cold War, by examining four representative intellectuals who grappled with the difficult question of labor’s role in society. Since the time of Marx, leftists have raised over and over the question of how an intelligentsia might participate in a movement carried out by the working class. Their modus operandi was to champion those who suffered injustice at the hands of the powerful. From the (...) late nineteenth through much of the twentieth century, this meant a focus on the industrial worker. The Great Depression was a time of remarkable consensus among leftist intellectuals, who often interpreted worker militancy as the harbinger of impending radical change. While most Americans waited out the crisis, listening to the assurances of President Franklin D. Roosevelt, the Marxian left was convinced that the crisis was systemic. Intellectuals who came of age during the Depression developed the view that the labor movement in America was to be the organizing base for a proletariat. Moreover, many came from working-class backgrounds that contributed to their support of labor. World War II and the resultant economic recovery shattered this coherence on the left. How did radicals opposed to capitalism deal with a labor movement that was very successful in terms of membership and power but clearly capitalist in its orientation? Coker describes the marked ambivalence and confusion of the intellectual left in the postwar years—a period of frustration brought on by a misreading of labor militancy during the 1930s and an unsuccessful search for a radical proletarian movement. The result was a politically and intellectually weakened left for decades to come. C_onfronting American Labor_ examines four individuals who represent a cross section of postwar radicalism. Each came of age on the socialist left, expecting that an anticapitalist movement would emerge from the ranks of labor. Seymour Martin Lipset and C. Wright Mills were professional sociologists. Sidney Lens spent his early life working within the labor movement before becoming a political commentator for a variety of leftist magazines and journals in the postwar era. Historian Herbert Gutman helped to create a “new labor history” that reflected broader transformations within the intellectual left. In tracing their various approaches to the problem of labor, C_onfronting American Labor_ explores the diverse nature of the postwar left. This important work will be of value to anyone interested in labor, class, and American thought. (shrink)

In the writings of the New Left are several images and a moral intensity which unwittingly have as their foundation various New England Puritan traditions.

This paper uses Albert Camus to provide insight into understanding the New Left from an empirical psychological perspective and a normative ethical perspective. In the process we show how Students for a Democratic Society (SDS) moved from rebels to revolutionaries.

This paper uses Albert Camus to provide insight into understanding the New Left from an empirical psychological perspective and a normative ethical perspective. In the process we show how Students for a Democratic Society (SDS) moved from rebels to revolutionaries.

The debates between liberalism and the New Left, which broke out in the middle of the 1990s, are a phenomenon rarely seen among mainland Chinese intellectuals since 1949. They are large-scale, spontaneous debates without official manipulation or ideological constraint. The debates involve Chinese scholars on the mainland and overseas, and have drawn the attention of Hong Kong and Taiwan intellectuals. Several collective papers on the debates have been published, and other selected papers are in the process of being compiled (...) and published. The debates are continuing. As an active participant in the debates and as a researcher in the history of Chinese thought in the 1980s and 1990s, I would like to summarize the main issues of the debates and to analyze why liberalism and the New Left emerged in the 1990s. (shrink)

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act created the nation's first comprehensive comparative effectiveness research (CER) program. According to some optimistic accounts, CER will revolutionize clinical practice and transform the health care delivery system. But what about public health? There are reasons for concern that it could end up left behind in the new era of comparative effectiveness. This article analyzes the considerable promise and serious limitations of applying CER to public health. It also highlights important issues that will (...) likely emerge for public health law and policy as the health care system transitions to greater reliance on CER. (shrink)

Most donated organs in the United States come from brain dead donors, while a small percentage come from patients who die in “controlled,” or expected, circumstances, typically after the family or surrogate makes a decision to withdraw life support. The number of organs available for transplant could be substantially if donations were permitted in “uncontrolled” circumstances–that is, from people who die unexpectedly, often outside the hospital. According to projections from the Institute of Medicine, establishing programs permitting “uncontrolled donation after circulatory (...) determination of death,” or uDCDD, throughout the United States has the potential to provide 22,000 more donation opportunities annually. In contrast, U.S. controlled donation after circulatory determination of death, or cDCDD, cases have increased progressively over the past decade from 87 to 848 donors, but currently account for only 10.6 percent of all deceased donors. Following the IOM recommendations, several projects exploring the feasibility of uDCDD were funded by the federal government, including a grant from the Health Resources and Services Administration that supported a pilot project in New York City in which the authors of this article participated.A key feature of our protocol, and indeed of many uDCDD protocols, is the initiation of preservation methods such as chest compressions and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation shortly after death in order to perfuse and preserve the donor's organs. Critics of uDCDD argue that the means of determining death deviates from generally ascribed principles. They assert that reinstituting circulation in order to preserve organs has the effect of “undoing” the prior determination of death. The result is that cDCDD is widely accepted and practiced routinely even though it only marginally increases the number of organs available for transplantation, and uDCDD is widely considered unacceptable despite being ethically embraced and proven to significantly increase organ donation opportunities in other countries. This article explores the evolution of this counterintuitive state of affairs and calls for a policy that, in line with the IOM report, allows for both cDCDD and uDCDD protocols. (shrink)

As a result of health care reform, medicine has entered a new era of comparative effectiveness. The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act created the nation’s first comprehensive comparative effectiveness research program, investing in CER at record levels and establishing a new regulatory framework for oversight of the research. CER attracts considerable enthusiasm as a tool for reform because it compares competing interventions to determine which works best, supplying critical information for medical decision-making and health policy. In theory, better evidence (...) of how treatments fare relative to one another will translate to better medical care. According to some optimistic accounts, CER can lead to a “revolution” in clinical practice, has transformative power “to reshape major portions of the practice of medicine,” and represents a major “turning point” for the health care system. (shrink)

The Marxian Legacy, first published in 1977 and released in a second edition in 1988, was and remains distinct in its view of Marxian theory as 'critique, ' aware of its own origins and limitations and self-conscious about its own historical rootedness in changing social and political conditions. This new and fully revised third edition retains the original synthesis of the divergent traditions of German, critical, and French Marxisms into a living Marxian legacy that changes and reconceptualizes itself, while also (...) providing a new critical introduction and concluding chapter. Such a re-evaluation of the Marxian legacy, which was urgent in the 1970s when the United States was caught up in imperial wars and domestic as well as racial conflict, remains relevant today when—as was the case nearly half a century ago—Marx’s legacy has largely been forgotten and yet remains as a symbol of radical thinking that could inspire the new movements. The Marxian Legacy, 3rd Edition retains the freshness of discovery from those times while fully updating the text for our contemporary moment, and adding two features: a philosophical closure; and, a perspective on what was possible then, and what remains to be done today. (shrink)

This essay takes the performance artworks of Tehching Hsieh as instructive allegories for a global ethics as theorized by a variety of left academics who ground universalism in a singularity that escapes the predicates of identity. Hsieh's projects, I argue, also place universal estrangement in the service of liberation for particular marginalized groups whose lives confound our fantasies of recognition. At the same time, they illustrate some of the challenges facing attempts to treat particular struggles as embodiments of universal (...) conflicts. (shrink)

I argue that to see certain textual practices as instances of plagiarism depends upon prior assumptions about the nature of authorship and originality. I introduce key ideas from Kant's essay "On the Unauthorized Publication of Books" as a clue to the modern notion of authorship and from Foucault's "What Is an Author?" which offers a postmodern deconstruction of the author. I explain how the current proliferation of student plagiarism can be viewed as a radical departure from both of these views, (...) pointing toward a future in which the creation of text is un-authored, anonymous, collective but non-collaborative, and dynamic. I suggest that faculty attitudes about plagiarism represent, in part, a failure to understand the changing economic, technological, and textual practices that are guiding students and administrators. Nonetheless, I maintain that plagiarism is unethical, even as I call for philosophers to rethink how our discipline might respond to these changing practices. (shrink)

Anyone who has a passing familiarity with left-wing activism will recognise the dilemma that Terence Renaud outlines in the first few pages of his book: “how does one sustain the dynamism of a gras...

As we approach the end of the twentieth century, the ways in which knowledge--scientific, social, and cultural--is produced are undergoing fundamental changes. In The New Production of Knowledge, a distinguished group of authors analyze these changes as marking the transition from established institutions, disciplines, practices, and policies to a new mode of knowledge production. Identifying such elements as reflexivity, transdisciplinarity, and heterogeneity within this new mode, the authors consider their impact and interplay with the role of knowledge in social relations. (...) While the knowledge produced by research and development in science and technology is accorded central focus, the authors also outline the changing dimensions of social scientific and humanities knowledge and the relations between the production of knowledge and its dissemination through education. Placing science policy and scientific knowledge within the broader context of contemporary society, this book will be essential reading for all those concerned with the changing nature of knowledge, with the social study of science, with educational systems, and with the correlation between research and development and social, economic, and technological development. "Thought-provoking in its identification of issues that are global in scope; for policy makers in higher education, government, or the commercial sector." --Choice "By their insightful identification of the recent social transformation of knowledge production, the authors have been able to assert new imperatives for policy institutions. The lessons of the book are deep." --Alexis Jacquemin, Universite Catholique de Louvain and Advisor, Foreign Studies Unit, European Commission "Should we celebrate the emergence of a 'post-academic' mode of postmodern knowledge production of the post-industrial society of the 21st Century? Or should we turn away from it with increasing fear and loathing as we also uncover its contradictions. A generation of enthusiasts and/or critics will be indebted to the team of authors for exposing so forcefully the intimate connections between all the cognitive, educational, organizational, and commercial changes that are together revolutionizing the sciences, the technologies, and the humanities. This book will surely spark off a vigorous and fruitful debate about the meaning and purpose of knowledge in our culture." --Professor John Ziman, (Wendy, Janey at Ltd. is going to provide affiliation. Contact if you don't hear from her.) "Jointly authored by a team of distinguished scholars spanning a number of disciplines, The New Production of Knowledge maps the changes in the mode of knowledge production and the global impact of such transformations. . . . The authors succeed . . . at sketching out, in very large strokes, the emerging trends in knowledge production and their implications for future society. The macro focus of the book is a welcome change from the micro obsession of most sociologists of science, who have pretty much deconstructed institutions and even scientific knowledge out of existence." --Contemporary Sociology "This book is a timely contribution to current discussion on the breakdown of and need to renegotiate the social contract between science and society that Vannevar Bush and likeminded architects of science policy constructed immediately after World War II. It goes far beyond the usual scattering of fragmentary insights into changing institutional landscapes, cognitive structures, or quality control mechanisms of present day science, and their linkages with society at large. Tapping a wide variety of sources, the authors provide a coherent picture of important new characteristics that, taken altogether, fundamentally challenge our traditional notions of what academic research is all about. This well-founded analysis of the social redistribution of knowledge and its associated power patterns helps articulate what otherwise tends to remain an--albeit widespread--intuition. Unless they adapt to the new situation, universities in the future will find the centers of gravity of knowledge production moving even further beyond their ken. Knowledge of the social and cognitive dynamics of science in research is much needed as a basis of science and technology policymaking. The New Production of Knowledge does a lot to fill this gap. Another unique feature is its discussion of the humanities, which are usually left out in works coming out of the social studies of science." --Aant Elzinga, University od Goteborg. (shrink)

Příspěvek vychází z autorova disertačního projektu, který mapuje myšlenkovou spřízněnost mezi Hansem Blumenbergem a jednotlivými filosofy tzv. Ritterovy školy, tedy Odo Marquardem, Hermannem Lübbem, Robertem Spaemannem a Martinem Krielem. Autor předkládá obecnou charakteristiku Ritterovy školy a „skeptické generace“ (H. Schelsky), hledá argumenty, které by osvětlily, proč bývá zdůrazňována spřízněnost mezi Blumenbergem a „Ritterovci“, a poukazuje na její filosofické konvergence v oblasti praktické filosofie. V analýze vychází z několika nesporných afinit mezi Marquardovým a Blumenbergovým myšlenkovým světem: z návaznosti na gehlenovské pojetí (...) člověka jako deficitní (a kompenzující) bytosti, z oslavy polyteismu, ze společných obtíží s filosofií dějin, které je vedou ke kritice diskurzivní etiky (v duchu Nové levice). Předkládá a zdůvodňuje tezi, podle níž se zmínění Ritterovi žáci přiblížili k sobě navzájem – a současně i k Blumenbergovi – nejvíce poté, co byli nuceni reagovat nejen na studentské hnutí druhé poloviny 60. let, jež zpochybnilo demokratické struktury Spolkové republiky, ale i na neomarxismus, o nějž se studentské hnutí opíralo. Druhou část studie tvoří analýza liberálně konzervativní kritiky diskurzivní etiky, jejíž jádro představuje překvapivé Marquardovo čtení Descarta: Descartes dočasné a provizorní morálky je zde postaven proti Descartovi nepochybnému metodicky zajištěnému. (shrink)

The article uses the ideal of a New Left to conceptualize the underlying unity of diverse political experiences during the past half century. Although Marx is not the direct object of this reconstruction, his specter is a recurring presence at those “nodal points” where the imperative to move to “another element” becomes apparent. These are moments when the spirit that has animated a movement can advance no further; it is faced with new obstacles, which may be self-created. The article (...) analyzes from a participant’s perspective the development of the New Left in the U.S., France and West Germany as it tried to articulate what is dubbed the "unknown dimension" of Marx’s theoretical project. (shrink)

When the New Organon appeared in 1620, part of a six-part programme of scientific inquiry entitled 'The Great Renewal of Learning', Francis Bacon was at the high point of his political career, and his ambitious work was groundbreaking in its attempt to give formal philosophical shape to a new and rapidly emerging experimentally-based science. Bacon combines theoretical scientific epistemology with examples from applied science, examining phenomena as various as magnetism, gravity, and the ebb and flow of the tides, and anticipating (...) later experimental work by Robert Boyle and others. His work challenges the entire edifice of the philosophy and learning of his time, and has left its mark on all subsequent philosophical discussions of scientific method. This volume presents a new translation of the text into modern English by Michael Silverthorne, and an introduction by Lisa Jardine that sets the work in the context of Bacon's scientific and philosophical activities. (shrink)