According to a libidinally charged slogan, Social Networking Services are meant to give "people the power to share and make the world more open and connected." But does the digital act of sharing personal information – invested in so many of the New Social Media – make such internet domains a public realm? What characterizes actually the public according to classical political theory, and what sort of performances become visible in digital fora under the banners of interactivity, friendship and an (...) alleged dissolution of boundaries? Against the background of increasingly elastic borders between things considered private and spaces declared public as well as of a remarkable spectrum of modes of sharing – ranging from disclosing daily trivia to collectively expressing political dissent – our contribution will examine the ambivalence of sharing in Social Net-working Services, not least in Facebook, in terms of a paradoxical nexus of passions and risks. (shrink)

This book argues that human rights cannot go global without going local. This important lesson from the winding debates on universalism and particularism raises intricate questions: what are human rights after all, given the dissent surrounding their foundations, content, and scope? What are legitimate deviances from classical human rights and where should we draw “red lines”? Making a case for balancing conceptual openness and distinctness, this book addresses the key human rights issues of our time and opens up novel spaces (...) for deliberation. It engages philosophical reasoning with law, politics, and religion and demonstrates that a meaningful relativist account of human rights is not only possible, but a sorely needed antidote to dogmatism and polarization. (shrink)

Die Frage moralischer und/oder rechtlicher Grenzen der Meinungsfreiheit, der Grenzen des Sagbaren und Tolerierbaren, stellt zunehmend eine gesellschaftliche und politische Metadebatte dar, in der Versuche, komplexe Phänomene des Aushandelns von Grenzen des Zulässigen bzw. Notwendigen semantisch zu fixieren, von erheblichem Lagerdenken zeugen. Wer von „Politischer Korrektheit“, „Cancel Culture“, „Meinungsdiktatur“ oder „Kontaktschuld“ spricht, steht klar auf der einen Seite, so scheint es; wer von „Diskriminierung“, „Rassismus“, „Hassrede“ oder „weißen Privilegien“ spricht, auf der anderen. Vor dem Hintergrund solch verfestigter Diskursbahnen stellt die (...) Frage, ob wir alles tolerieren müssen, was andere sagen, eine Erwägungsaufgabe dar, die nur mit einem Schritt zurück überhaupt adressierbar ist, will man nicht mit dem Jargon der einen Seite die Anliegen der anderen ausschließen und damit den ungeprüften Eindruck befördern, es handle sich hier tatsächlich um eine unversöhnliche Polarisierung, der die Philosophie nichts hinzuzufügen habe, außer vielleicht ein Lamento oder eine moralische Geste. Der Umweg, über den ich im Folgenden die von dieser Schwerpunktausgabe gestellte Frage behandeln möchte, führt zunächst zu einer Analyse der Ansprüche, die plurale Demokratien an ihre Mitglieder stellen. Diese sind nicht nur grundsätzlich hoch, sondern mitunter auch in sich konfliktträchtig. Konkret betrifft dies die Anforderung an Mitglieder demokratischer Gemeinwesen, sowohl bürgerliche Toleranz zu üben als auch diskursives Engagement als Vorbedingung qualitätsvoller demokratischer Meinungsbildung und Entscheidungsfindung an den Tag zu legen. Die jeweils ‚richtige Mitte‘ lässt sich dann am besten finden, wenn die Risiken zweier Extreme bewusstgemacht werden, die daran geknüpft sind, dass einerseits ein zu hohes Maß an ziviler Toleranz zulasten diskursiven Engagements geht und andererseits ein Mangel an bürgerlicher Toleranz diskursives Engagement gefährdet. Entlang dieser beiden Formen einer verhängnisvollen Dysbalance des demokratischen Ethos möchte ich Grundzüge einer demokratischen Ethik der freien Rede und freien Widerrede herausarbeiten und Implikationen für Grenzen von Meinungsfreiheit bzw. Kritik beleuchten. (shrink)

Johannes Drerup schlägt für normativ-politische Kontroversen ein Kriterium vor, anhand dessen bestimmt werden soll, wann diese Kontroversen legitime Unterrichtsthemen sind und in Folge dem Kontroversitätsgebot unterliegen. Dies ist dann der Fall, wenn für kontroverse Fragen „auf Basis politischer Grundwerte und -prinzipien, die als konstitutiv gelten können für die Ermöglichung eines guten persönlichen und politischen Lebens in liberal-demokratischen Staaten, keine eindeutige Antwort abgeleitet werden kann.“ Zu diesen Grundwerten und -prinzipien zählt Drerup auch „Grund- und Menschenechte“. Mein kurzer Beitrag möchte zeigen, weshalb (...) Drerups an sich fruchtbarer Ansatz die Komplexität des Maßstabes „Grundund Menschenrechte“ tendenziell unterschätzt und insbesondere das Verhältnis von Demokratie und Menschenrechten zu wenig als potenzielles Spannungsverhältnis ernst nimmt. Ich schlage daher weitere Differenzierungen vor, um Drerups Kriterium konzeptionell zu schärfen. Zudem rege ich an, Kontroversen, die Drerups Kriterium nicht genügen, aus didaktischen Gründen dennoch eine gewisse Anfangs-Kontroversität zuzugestehen, um die Bedeutung der betreffenden Grundprinzipien, die als „rote Linien“ fungieren, deutlicher herausarbeiten zu können. (shrink)

In our era of globalization, migration increasingly enforces cultural heterogeneity at the level of single societies and countries mirroring the cultural heterogeneity at the macroscopic level, i.e. the planet. Thus, the question of intercultural understanding and coexistence not only is crucial when it comes to states, but is increasingly gaining in importance in terms of identifying preconditions that enable individuals from various cultural backgrounds to share one commonwealth. At present, a growing number of people are convinced that this challenge is (...) not easily met due to what are believed to be fundamental moral disagreements between ‘western’ and ‘non-western’ (in particular, Islamic) culture(s). Against this background, different proposals have been provided to rise to the above-mentioned challenge. One of them is to allow for ‘cultural’ justifications in matters of criminal law. In this article I try to outline the state of discussion on claims for a ‘cultural defense’ by identifying and analysing three distinct rationales: the argument from pluralism; the argument from fairness; and the argument from necessity. Finally, I critically reflect on them from a human rights perspective. (shrink)

Publications of the series include the official proceedings of the ALWS-conferences and of their special workshops. The series is open also for other high-quality publications, especially on the philosophy of Ludwig Wittgenstein and its influence on contemporary analytic philosophy.

A sample of college women and men responded to a survey assessing attitudes, beliefs, experiences, and behaviors relevant to sexual harassment and assault. Men were more tolerant of sexual harassment, more likely to believe that heterosexual relationships were adversarial, more likely to subscribe to rape myths, and more likely to admit that they might sexually assault someone under some circumstances. Data from the present study support the proposition that relevant affective, cognitive, and behavioral indices of hostile sexuality directed against women (...) are linked, supporting the assumption of a continuum of misogyny. Significant positive correlations were predicted and found among men's self-reported tolerance for sexual harassment, adversarial sexual beliefs, rape-myth acceptance, likelihood to rape, and experience as a sexual victimizer. Among women, belief and attitude measures were positively correlated but, as predicted, experience of sexual victimization was not reliably related to any other measure, supporting the conclusion that personal characteristics are not relevant to college women's sexual victimization. (shrink)

This chapter contains sections titled: Feminist Philosophy in a Historical Context Feminist Perspectives in Philosophy Feminist Methodologies: Key Issues New Orientations References Further Reading.

En Simone de Beauvoir, Madre del feminismo Marí a Luisa Femení as analiza las propuestas de Beauvoir, muchas veces incomprendidas, desmerecidas o adjudicadas a otros pensadores, desde una perspectiva global, para confrontarlas con las de sus sucesoras. Luego de má s de setenta añ os de relecturas, se puede afirmar que los aportes de esta filó sofa francesa redefinieron la cultura y el pensamiento de la humanidad. Su obra es un pilar sobre el que se alzan los movimientos sociales (...) actuales que incluyen a todas las personas que viven en condiciones de exclusió n, opresió n e invisibilizació n a raí z de las estructuras sociales histó ricas. Elizabeth Badinter considera que Beauvoir Fue la tierra fé rtil que nos ha permitido ser lo que somos. La mujer que nunca quiso ser madre, engendró el movimiento feminista y tiene, hasta hoy, miles de hijas en todo el mundo. Es a travé s de su obra, El segundo sexo (1949), que las generaciones actuales de pensadoras analizan el mundo. (shrink)

The symposium, “How is gender relevant to comparative philosophy,” focuses on relevance of gender as an analytic and critical tool in comparative philosophical understanding and debate. Nkiru Nzegwu argues that gender as conceived by contemporary Euro-American feminism did not exist in pre-colonial Yorùbá as well as many Native American societies, and that therefore employing gender as a conceptual category in understanding the philosophies of pre-colonial Yorùbá and other non-gendered societies constitutes a profound mistake. What’s more, doing so amounts to a (...) totalizing Euro-American colonial imposition that does violence to nongendered societies that reject gender as an ontological category. Hence, gender is ill-suited as a universal comparative philosophical tool. Nzegwu’s three co-symposiasts, Mary I. Bockover, Maitrayee Chaudhuri, and María Luisa Femenías enrich and complicate this question by bringing to bear both conceptual, ethical and empirical considerations drawn from the United States, India, and Latin America respectively. (shrink)

Las mujeres desafiaron la condición de "inferiores", "incapaces" o "dependientes" a que las destinaba su esencia femenina. Eligieron la literatura, la ciencia y la filosofía para expresarse. Incluso, en los períodos más adversos por la censura pública, algunas de ellas teorizaron en diarios íntimos o epístolas. Muchas veces se les prohibió el uso de la palabra y de la pluma, o simplemente fueron asesinadas por proseguir sus investigaciones. Durante largos períodos, no les fue permitido firmar con nombre propio sus textos, (...) para no deshonrar a sus familias, figurando su obra como de "autor anónimo". Superada la etapa de anonimato forzado, la mayoría firmaba con su inicial y su apellido paterno o marital, o un seudónimo masculino, desdibujándose así su autoría. Lo cierto es que la mayoría de las filósofas tuvo que esperar hasta el siglo XX para que sus obras fueran rescatadas del anonimato. Las mujeres llevaron a cabo un debate interesante respecto de la no-sexuación del alma. Desde la Antigüedad, la mayoría de los filósofos varones sostuvo una concepción dualista del ser humano, es decir, en términos de cuerpo y alma unidos pero separados o separables. Ellos sostuvieron que la carne o cuerpo material limitaba al alma o la razón. Y como los cuerpos de las mujeres sufren procesos que no controlan -menstruación, embarazo, lactancia-no alcanzan la perfección, son materia imperfecta, haciéndolas esto más débiles, fofas y frágiles. Sin embargo, ellas siempre entendieron al "alma" o "razón" como a-sexuada y al "cuerpo" como portador de las marcas del sexo, de la raza u otras. Es decir, que un mismo argumento les valió para desmontar la jerarquización de los sexos y de las razas impuesto al pensamiento a lo largo de los siglos. Por esto, para conocer las ideas, la obra y los aportes de estas mujeres, Ellas lo pensaron antes. Filósofas excluidas de la memoria reúne una selección de veintidós filósofas que desde la Antigüedad hasta nuestros días han contribuido y contribuyen a la construcción del pensamiento y el desarrollo de la sociedad. Ellas lo pensaron antes aims to shed a light on the lives of extraordinary women who defied conventional female roles by devoting themselves to literature, science, and philosophy. In these pages, readers will become acquainted with the ideas, works, and contributions of twenty-two female philosophers from Antiquity until the present time who have been--and still are--instrumental to the evolution of ideas and the development of our societies. ​. (shrink)

La identidad nacional -- La filosofía contemporánea en la Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos de Lima -- Las correintes contemporáneas de la filosofía peruana y latinoamericana.

In the contemporary context of increasing inequality and various forms of segregation, this volume analyzes the transition to neoliberal politics in Santiago de Chile. Using an innovative methodological approach that combines georeferenced data and multi-stage cluster analysis, Méndez and Gayo study the old and new mechanisms of social reproduction among the upper middle class. In so doing, they not only capture the interconnections between macro- and microsocial dimensions such as urban dynamics, schooling demands, cultural repertoires and socio-spatial trajectories, but also (...) offer a detailed account of elite formation, intergenerational accumulation, and economic, cultural, and social inheritance dynamics. (shrink)

This multi-faceted collection of women's perspectives on the renaissance in philosophical practices provides an international overview on the professional practice of philosophical counseling as rooted in the ancient philosophical discipline of life and its essential difference from modern mainstream philosophy.

A striking feature of atrocities, as seen in genocides, civil wars or violence against certain racial and ethnic groups, is the attempt to dehumanize – to deny and strip human beings of their humanity. Yet the very nature of dehumanization remains relatively poorly understood. The Routledge Handbook of Dehumanization is the first comprehensive and multidisciplinary reference source on the subject and an outstanding survey of the key concepts, issues and debates within dehumanization studies. Organized into four parts, the Handbook covers (...) the following key topics: (I) The history of dehumanization from Greek Antiquity to the Twentieth century, contextualizing the oscillating boundaries, dimensions, and hierarchies of humanity in the history of the ‘West’. (II) How dehumanization is contemporarily studied with respect to special contexts: as part of social psychology, as part of legal studies or literary studies, and how it connects to the idea of human rights, disability and eugenics, the question of animals, and the issue of moral standing. (III) How to tackle its complex facets, with respect to the perpetrator’s and the target’s perspective, metadehumanization and selfdehumanization, rehumanization, social death, status and interdependence, as well as the fear we show towards robots that become too human for us. (IV) Conceptual and epistemological questions on how to distinguish different forms of dehumanization and neighboring phenomena, on why dehumanization appears so paradoxical, and on its connection to hatred, essentialism, and perception. -- Essential reading for students and researchers in philosophy, history, psychology, and anthropology this Handbook will also be of interest to those in related disciplines such as politics, international relations, criminology, legal studies, literary studies, gender studies, disability studies, or race and ethnic studies, as well as readers from social work, political activism, and public policy --- Table of Contents: Introduction. 1. Mapping dehumanization studies. – Maria Kronfeldner. Part I. Oscillating boundaries, dimensions, and hierarchies of humanity in historical contexts. 2. Dehumanization Before the Columbian exchange – Siep Stuurman. 3. 'Humanity' and its Limits in Early Modern European Thought – László Kontler. 4. Enlightenment Humanization and Dehumanization and the Orang-utan – Silvia Sebastiani. 5. Dehumanizing the Exotic in Living Human Exhibitions – Guido Abbattista. 6. Dehumanizing Strategies in Nazi Ideology and their Anthropological Context – Johannes Steizinger. 7. Theorizing the Inhumanity of Human Nature, 1955-1985 – Erika Lorraine Milam. Part II: Further special contexts of dehumanization. 8. The Social Psychology of Dehumanization – Nick Haslam. 9. Dehumanization and the Loss of Moral Standing – Edouard Machery. 10. Dehumanization and the Question of Animals – Alice Crary. 11. Dehumanization, Disability, and Eugenics – Robert A. Wilson. 12. Dehumanization and Human Rights – Marie-Luisa Frick. 13. Dehumanization by Law – Luigi Corrias. 14. Dehumanisation in Literature and the Figure of the Perpetrator – Andrea Timár. Part III: The complex facets of dehumanization. 15. Dehumanization and Social Death as Fundamentals of Racism – Wulf D. Hund. 16. How Status and Interdependence Explain Different Forms of Dehumanization – Susan T. Fiske. 17. Exploring Metadehumanization and Self-dehumanization from a Target Perspective – Stéphanie Demoulin, Pierre Maurage, Florence Stinglhamber. 18. The Dehumanization and Rehumanization of Refugees – Victoria M. Esses, Stelian Medianu, Alina Sutter. 19. Motivational and Cognitive Underpinnings of Fear of Social Robots that become ‘Too Human for Us’ – Maria Paola Paladino, Jeroen Vaes, Jolanda Jetten. Part IV: Conceptual and epistemological questions regarding dehumanization. 20. Objectification, Inferiorization and Projection in Phenomenological Research on Dehumanization – Sara Heinämaa and James Jardine. 21. Why Dehumanization is Distinct from Objectification – Mari Mikkola. 22. On Hatred and Dehumanization – Thomas Brudholm and Johannes Lang. 23. Dehumanization, the Problem of Humanity, and the Problem of Monstrosity – David Livingstone Smith. 24. Psychological Essentialism and Dehumanization – Maria Kronfeldner. 25. Could Dehumanization Be Perceptual? – Somogy Varga. (shrink)

The central aim of this article is to specify the ontological nature of constitutive mechanistic phenomena. After identifying three criteria of adequacy that any plausible approach to constitutive mechanistic phenomena must satisfy, we present four different suggestions, found in the mechanistic literature, of what mechanistic phenomena might be. We argue that none of these suggestions meets the criteria of adequacy. According to our analysis, constitutive mechanistic phenomena are best understood as what we will call ‘object-involving occurrents’. Furthermore, on the basis (...) of this notion, we will clarify what distinguishes constitutive mechanistic explanations from etiological ones. 1 Introduction 2 Criteria of Adequacy 2.1 Descriptive adequacy 2.2 Constitutive–etiological distinction 2.3 Constitution 3 The Ontological Nature of Constitutive Mechanistic Phenomena 3.1 Phenomena as input–output relations 3.2 Phenomena as end states 3.3 Phenomena as dispositions 3.4 Phenomena as behaviours 4 Phenomena as Object-Involving Occurrents 4.1 What object-involving occurrents are and why we need them 4.2 The object in the phenomenon 4.3 The adequacy of option 5 Conclusion. (shrink)

Discussion of Wittgenstein's Tractatus is currently dominated by two opposing interpretations of the work: a metaphysical or realist reading and the 'resolute' reading of Diamond and Conant. Marie McGinn's principal aim in this book is to develop an alternative interpretative line, which rejects the idea, central to the metaphysical reading, that Wittgenstein sets out to ground the logic of our language in features of an independently constituted reality, but which allows that he aims to provide positive philosophical insights into (...) how language functions. McGinn takes as a guiding principle the idea that we should see Wittgenstein's early work as an attempt to eschew philosophical theory and to allow language itself to reveal how it functions. By this account, the aim of the work is to elucidate what language itself makes clear, namely, what is essential to its capacity to express thoughts that are true or false. However, the early Wittgenstein undertakes this descriptive project in the grip of a set of preconceptions concerning the essence of language that determine both how he conceives the problem and the approach he takes to the task of clarification. Nevertheless, the Tractatus contains philosophical insights, achieved despite his early preconceptions, that form the foundation of his later philosophy. -/- The anti-metaphysical interpretation that is presented includes a novel reading of the problematic opening sections of the Tractatus, in which the apparently metaphysical status of Wittgenstein's remarks is shown to be an illusion. The book includes a discussion of the philosophical background to the Tractatus, a comprehensive interpretation of Wittgenstein's early views of logic and language, and an interpretation of the remarks on solipsism. The final chapter is a discussion of the relation between the early and the later philosophy that articulates the fundamental shift in Wittgenstein's approach to the task of understanding how language functions and reveal the still more fundamental continuity in his conception of his philosophical task. (shrink)

I argue that the debate on the division of labor between grammar and pragmatics, at least as it pertains to pragmatic free enrichment, needs to be better grounded empirically. Often, only a reduced set of facts from English is used to substantiate claims regarding pragmatic free enrichment. But considering a reduced set of facts from a single language can only afford limited (and, sometimes, wrong) results, because we can merely see whatever this one language chooses to express. Two cases studies (...) are presented: adjectival fragments, and implicit indefinite objects. A grammatical analysis is defended for them. (shrink)

Leuridan (2011) questions whether mechanisms can really replace laws at the heart of our thinking about science. In doing so, he enters a long-standing discussion about the relationship between the mech-anistic structures evident in the theories of contemporary biology and the laws of nature privileged especially in traditional empiricist traditions of the philosophy of science (see e.g. Wimsatt 1974; Bechtel and Abrahamsen 2005; Bogen 2005; Darden 2006; Glennan 1996; MDC 2000; Schaffner 1993; Tabery 2003; Weber 2005). In our view, Leuridan (...) misconstrues this discussion. His weak positive claim that mechanistic sciences appeal to generalizations is true but uninteresting. His stronger claim, that all causal claims require laws, is unsupported by his arguments. Though we proceed by criticizing Leuridan’s arguments, our greater purpose is to embellish his arguments in order to show how thinking about mechanisms enriches and transforms old philosophical debates about laws in biology and provides new insights into how generalizations afford prediction, explanation and control. (shrink)

Mechanisms are said to consist of two kinds of components, entities and activities. In the first half of this chapter, I examine what entities and activities are, how they relate to well-known ontological categories, such as processes or dispositions, and how entities and activities relate to each other (e.g., can one be reduced to the other or are they mutually dependent?). The second part of this chapter analyzes different criteria for individuating the components of mechanisms and discusses how real the (...) boundaries of mechanisms are. (shrink)

Individuals of many animal species are said to have a personality. It has been shown that some individuals are bolder than other individuals of the same species, or more sociable or more aggressive. In this paper, we analyse what it means to say that an animal has a personality. We clarify what an animal personality is, that is, its ontology, and how different personality concepts relate to each other, and we examine how personality traits are identified in biological practice. Our (...) analysis shows that biologists often study specific personality traits, such as boldness, sociability or aggressiveness, rather than personalities in general. We claim that personality traits are best understood as dispositions and that they are operationally defined in terms of certain sets of behaviours, which are studied in specific experimental set-ups. Furthermore, we develop an integrative philosophical account that specifies and formalises three criteria for identifying personality traits, which are used in biological practice. For an individual animal to have a personality trait it must, first, behave differently than others. Second, these behavioural differences must be stable over a certain time, and third, they must be consistent in different contexts. (shrink)

Agonistic Democracy explores how theoretical concepts from agonistic democracy can inform institutional design in order to mediate conflict in multicultural, pluralist societies. Drawing on the work of Foucault, Nietzsche, Schmitt, and Arendt, Marie Paxton outlines the importance of their themes of public contestation, contingency and necessary interdependency for contemporary agonistic thinkers. Paxton delineates three distinct approaches to agonistic democracy: David Owen's perfectionist agonism, Mouffe's adversarial agonism, and William Connolly and James Tully's inclusive agonism. Paxton demonstrates how each is fundamental (...) to enabling citizens to cultivate better virtues for themselves and society (Owen), motivating democratic engagement (Mouffe) and enhancing relations of respect and understanding between conflicting citizens (Connolly and Tully). Situated within the context of a deeply polarised post-Trump America and post-Brexit Britain, this book reveals the need to rethink our approach to conflict mediation through democratic institutions. Pulling together insights from experimental research with deliberative democratic innovations, Paxton explores how agonistic theory might be institutionalised further. Through discussing ways in which agonistic institutions might be developed to render democracy more virtuous, more engaging, and more inclusive, Agonistic Democracy provides a unique resource for students of contemporary political theory. (shrink)

What are the conditions under which one biological object is a part of another biological object? This paper answers this question by developing a general, systematic account of biological parthood. I specify two criteria for biological parthood. Substantial Spatial Inclusionrequires biological parts to be spatially located inside or in the region that the natural boundary of t he biological whole occupies. Compositional Relevance captures the fact that a biological part engages in a biological process that must make a necessary contribution (...) to a condition that is minimally sufficient to one or more of the characteristic behaviors of the biological whole. Instead of emphasizing the diversity of part-whole relations in the biological world, this paper asks what biological part-whole relations have in common and what constrains their existence, in general. After presenting the two criteria for biological parthood I discuss in how far my account can cope with hard cases (e.g., redundant parts) and I reveal the merits and limits of monism. (shrink)

Despite the social, economic and ethical problems facing government in the Czech Republic, there are positive signs of a growing concern for ethical business, including the development of codes of conduct and a striking example of new corporate social responsibility. Dr Bohatá is a member of the Economics Institute of the Academy of Sciences, Politickych Veznu 7, 111 21 Prague 1, and an Associate Editor of this Review.

In the contemporary life sciences more and more researchers emphasize the “limits of reductionism” (e.g. Ahn et al. 2006a, 709; Mazzocchi 2008, 10) or they call for a move “beyond reductionism” (Gallagher/Appenzeller 1999, 79). However, it is far from clear what exactly they argue for and what the envisioned limits of reductionism are. In this paper I claim that the current discussions about reductionism in the life sciences, which focus on methodological and explanatory issues, leave the concepts of a reductive (...) method and a reductive explanation too unspecified. In order to fill this gap and to clarify what the limits of reductionism are I identify three reductive methods that are crucial in the current practice of the life sciences: decomposition, focusing on internal factors, and studying parts in isolation. Furthermore, I argue that reductive explanations in the life sciences exhibit three characteristics: first, they refer only to factors at a lower level than the phenomenon at issue, second, they focus on internal factors and thus ignore or simplify the environment of a system, and, third, they cite only the parts of a system in isolation. (shrink)

Jean-Luc Nancy is one of the leading contemporary thinkers in France today. Through an inventive reappropriation of the major figures in the continental tradition, Nancy has developed an original ontology that impacts the way we think about religion, politics, community, embodiment, and art. Drawing from a wide range of his writing, Marie-Eve Morin provides the first comprehensive and systematic account of Nancy’s thinking, all the way up to his most recent work on the deconstruction of Christianity. Without losing sight (...) of the heterogeneity of Nancy’s work, Morin presents a concise articulation of the organizing concepts, which structure Nancy’s body of work. The guiding thread is that of an essential rift at the heart of any “self” by which this self is exposed and relates to itself and other selves. Nancy’s ontology undercuts dichotomies between individual and community, interior and exterior, matter and spirit, thing and thought, not in the name of mere deconstruction, but in seeking to open a thinking of the “limit” or the “edge” as the locus of sense. While Nancy’s work has often been presented in relation to Heidegger or Derrida, Morin demonstrates the originality of Nancy’s work and argues that, despite the variety of its preoccupations and topics, it possesses its own rigorous internal logic. This book will be of interest to students and scholars of philosophy and related fields who seek a systematic and critical understanding of one of the most original contemporary thinkers. (shrink)