Enmity or Friendship?

2019 ◽  
pp. 11-36
Author(s):  
Gerald M. Mara
Keyword(s):  
Political Philosophy ◽  
Political Thought ◽  
Jacques Derrida ◽  
Frame Of Reference ◽  
Carl Schmitt ◽  
The Political ◽  
War And Peace ◽  
History Of

Chapter 1 interprets statements offered by two twentieth-century philosophers, Carl Schmitt, principally in The Concept of the Political, and Jacques Derrida, in his critique of Schmitt in The Politics of Friendship. Both works make the importance of political philosophy’s frame of reference explicit, though they offer opposed characterizations of its content. I argue that the substantive positions taken in the two works share more characteristics than initially apparent. Schmitt’s characterization of enmity as the essence of politics must accommodate a kind of mutuality. And Derrida’s political friendship eventually constructs its own distinctive enemy. Those complicating parallels diminish confidence in either author’s ability to settle the question of how political thought should be framed and prompt a reconsideration of how allegedly overarching imperatives of war and peace have been treated within the history of Western political philosophy.

scholarly journals The Use ofKairosin Renaissance Political Philosophy*

2014 ◽  
Vol 67 (1) ◽  
pp. 43-78 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joanne Paul
Keyword(s):  
Political Philosophy ◽  
Sixteenth Century ◽  
Political Thought ◽  
The Political ◽  
Ancient Greek ◽  
History Of Political Thought ◽  
Important Concept ◽  
Niccolò Machiavelli ◽  
Greek Tradition ◽  
History Of

AbstractAlthough the Greek concept ofkairos (καιρός)has undergone a recent renewal of interest among scholars of Renaissance rhetoric, this revival has not yet been paralleled by its reception into the history of political thought. This article examines the meanings and uses of this important concept within the ancient Greek tradition, particularly in the works of Isocrates and Plutarch, in order to understand how it is employed by two of the most important political thinkers of the sixteenth century: Thomas Elyot and Niccolò Machiavelli. Through such an investigation this paper argues that an appreciation of the concept ofkairosand its use by Renaissance political writers provides a fuller understanding of the political philosophy of the period.

De la condición política medieval: el paradigma político antes de la crisis

1970 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
Author(s):  
José María Rosales
Keyword(s):  
Political Philosophy ◽  
Political Thought ◽  
The Political ◽  
History Of Political Thought ◽  
Political Condition ◽  
History Of ◽  
Basic Features ◽  
Political Realm

RESUMENEl trabajo presenta algunos de los rasgos básicos de la condición política moderna. Esboza así su génesis interna desde la sacralización del ámbito político hasta los inicios de la secularización en el siglo XIII. Para ilustrar ambos momentos de la filosofía política de Santo Tomás (elaborada a la luz de los textos de Aristóteles) provee una argumentación básica que, aun siendo incompleta para reconstruir este tránsito, resulta significativamente clarificadora. PALABRAS CLAVEFILOSOFIA POLITICA MEDIEVAL-HISTORIA DEL PENSAMIENTO POLITICO- SANTO TOMAS DE AQUINOABSTRACTThe paper presents some of the basic features of the medieval political condition. This, it outlines the genesis from the sacralization of the political realm to the beginnings of secularization in the XIIIth century. To illustrate both moments, Saint Thomas' political philosophy (worked out in the ight of Aristotle's thext) provdes a significant, though incomplete, argumentative basis. KEYWORDSMEDIEVAL POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY-HISTORY OF POLITICAL THOUGHT- AQUINAS

scholarly journals Pierre Clastres as comparative political theorist: The democratic potential of the new political anthropology

2017 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 67-94
Author(s):  
Christopher Holman
Keyword(s):  
Political Philosophy ◽  
Political Theory ◽  
Political Thought ◽  
Alternative Model ◽  
Political Anthropology ◽  
The Political ◽  
Mutual Understanding ◽  
Comparative Political Theory ◽  
Intercultural Exchange ◽  
History Of

This article examines the political anthropological work of Pierre Clastres in light of the emergence of the subfield of comparative political theory. In particular, it argues that Clastres’ reconstruction of the political philosophy of various Amazonian societies offers an alternative model for the engagement with texts and traditions external to the history of so-called Western societies. Rejecting all impulses toward totalization – as represented, for example, in the assertion of a dialogical potential for establishing modes of intercultural exchange aimed at achieving mutual understanding – Clastres calls attention to the radical social-historical alterity of forms of society. Appreciation of this alterity not only enlarges the scope of comparative political thought to engage inherited traditions that resist assimilation into Western conversations, but also reveals an indeterminate democratic potential grounded in political creativity.

Political Philosophy in War and Peace

2019 ◽  
pp. 1-10
Author(s):  
Gerald M. Mara
Keyword(s):  
Political Philosophy ◽  
Broad Spectrum ◽  
Political Thought ◽  
First Century ◽  
Frames Of Reference ◽  
War And Peace ◽  
History Of ◽  
Twenty First Century ◽  
Moral Choices ◽  
Central Claim

This book interprets how ideas of war and peace have functioned as frames of reference within the history of Western political philosophy. Its purposes are both theoretical and practical. These seeming alternatives inform a broad spectrum of political thought, contextualizing the questions we ask about politics, the descriptions of the pragmatic and moral choices we face, and the concepts and metaphors we employ. Beyond theory, this inquiry responds to practical challenges confronting democratic citizens in the twenty-first century. The book’s central claim is that the persistence of both war and peace must be acknowledged as framing conditions for a political philosophy capable of informing the critical judgments that citizens need to exercise, particularly in times of intense regime stress or disturbing human precarity. The author presents five thematic chapters that examine how these alternative perspectives have functioned within some of Western political theory’s most significant works.

scholarly journals Temporalidade e refutabilidade dos conceitos políticos

2016 ◽  
Vol 1 (35) ◽  
Author(s):  
Elías José Palti
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual History ◽  
Latin American ◽  
Political Thought ◽  
Carl Schmitt ◽  
The Political ◽  
History Of Political Thought ◽  
American Political Thought ◽  
History Of ◽  
American Intellectual History ◽  
Controversial Nature

Temporalidade e refutabilidade dos conceitos políticos[1]Temporality and refutability of political concepts Elías José Palti[2] RESUMO: Nas últimas décadas, o conceito do “político” de Carl Schmmitt tem ressurgido nos debates sobre teoria política, e isso também teve importante repercussão no campo da história intelectual. A distinção entre política e o político permitiu-nos reconsiderar a natureza de conceitos políticos, reavaliar a sua natureza controversa. Isso é visto agora como um resultado de sua indefinição. O fato de que conceitos como democracia, justiça, liberdade, etc. não aceitam qualquer definição, que resistem a toda tentativa, nasceria da natureza intrinsecamente aporética deles, isto é, do fato de que eles não se referem a nenhum conjunto de ideias ou princípios que poderiam ser listados, mas sim que servem como índices de problemas. O presente artigo pretende rastrear essa transformação teórica no campo da história política-intelectual, suas consequências para a pesquisa histórica. E também como isso afetou nossos meios de abordar a história intelectual latino-americana. PALAVRAS-CHAVE: História do Pensamento Político. História Intelectual. História do Pensamento Político Latino-americano. ABSTRACT: In the last decades, Carl Schmitt´s concept of the political has resurface in the debates on political theory, and it has had important repercussion in the field of intellectual history, too. The distinction between politics and the political allowed us to reconsider the nature of political concepts, reassess their controversial nature. It is now seen as a result of their undefinability. The fact that concepts like democracy, justice, freedom, and so on, do not accept any definition, that resist all attempt, would spring from the intrinsically aporetic nature of them, that is, that they do not refer to any given set of ideas of principles that could be listed, but rather they serve as indexes of problems. The present article intends to trace this theoretical transformation in the field of political-intellectual history, its consequences for historical research. And also how this affect our ways of approaching Latin American intellectual history. KEYWORDS: History of Political Thought. Intellectual History. History of Latin American Political Thought.[1] Publicação original: PALTI, Elías José. Temporalidad y refutabilidad de los conceptos políticos. Prismas: revista de história intelectual, n. 9, p. 19-34, 2005. Tradução de Pedro Prazeres Fraga Pereira e Vicente de Azevedo Bastian Cortese.[2] Professor da Universidad Nacional de Quilmes (Argentina) e da Universidad de Buenos Aires (Argentina). Investigador do Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas – CONICET.

Utopophobia

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Estlund
Keyword(s):  
Political Philosophy ◽  
Social Justice ◽  
Political Thought ◽  
Political Action ◽  
Ideal Theory ◽  
Theory Of Justice ◽  
Sound Theory ◽  
Theory Versus ◽  
History Of ◽  
Practical Guidance

Throughout the history of political philosophy and politics, there has been continual debate about the roles of idealism versus realism. For contemporary political philosophy, this debate manifests in notions of ideal theory versus nonideal theory. Nonideal thinkers shift their focus from theorizing about full social justice, asking instead which feasible institutional and political changes would make a society more just. Ideal thinkers, on the other hand, question whether full justice is a standard that any society is likely ever to satisfy. And, if social justice is unrealistic, are attempts to understand it without value or importance, and merely utopian? This book argues against thinking that justice must be realistic, or that understanding justice is only valuable if it can be realized. The book does not offer a particular theory of justice, nor does it assert that justice is indeed unrealizable—only that it could be, and this possibility upsets common ways of proceeding in political thought. The book's author engages critically with important strands in traditional and contemporary political philosophy that assume a sound theory of justice has the overriding, defining task of contributing practical guidance toward greater social justice. Along the way, it counters several tempting perspectives, including the view that inquiry in political philosophy could have significant value only as a guide to practical political action, and that understanding true justice would necessarily have practical value, at least as an ideal arrangement to be approximated. Demonstrating that unrealistic standards of justice can be both sound and valuable to understand, the book stands as a trenchant defense of ideal theory in political philosophy.

Between Specters of War and Visions of Peace

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gerald M. Mara
Keyword(s):  
Political Philosophy ◽  
International Relations ◽  
Political Theory ◽  
Democratic Theory ◽  
First Century ◽  
Political Life ◽  
Frames Of Reference ◽  
War And Peace ◽  
History Of ◽  
Western Democracies

This book examines how ideas of war and peace have functioned as organizing frames of reference within the history of political theory. It interprets ten widely read figures in that history within five thematically focused chapters that pair (in order) Schmitt and Derrida, Aquinas and Machiavelli, Hobbes and Kant, Hegel and Nietzsche, and Thucydides and Plato. The book’s substantive argument is that attempts to establish either war or peace as dominant intellectual perspectives obscure too much of political life. The book argues for a style of political theory committed more to questioning than to closure. It challenges two powerful currents in contemporary political philosophy: the verdict that premodern or metaphysical texts cannot speak to modern and postmodern societies, and the insistence that all forms of political theory be some form of democratic theory. What is offered instead is a nontraditional defense of the tradition and a democratic justification for moving beyond democratic theory. Though the book avoids any attempt to show the immediate relevance of these interpretations to current politics, its impetus stems very much from the current political circumstances. Since the beginning of the twenty-first century , a series of wars has eroded confidence in the progressively peaceful character of international relations; citizens of the Western democracies are being warned repeatedly about the threats posed within a dangerous world. In this turbulent context, democratic citizens must think more critically about the actions their governments undertake. The texts interpreted here are valuable resources for such critical thinking.

Introduction

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rembert Lutjeharms
Keyword(s):  
Sixteenth Century ◽  
Political History ◽  
The Political ◽  
Poetry And Poetics ◽  
Sanskrit Poetics ◽  
History Of ◽  
Sanskrit Poetry ◽  
The Way

This chapter introduces the main themes of the book—Kavikarṇapūra, theology, Sanskrit poetry, and Sanskrit poetics—and provides an overview of each chapter. It briefly highlights the importance of the practice of poetry for the Caitanya Vaiṣṇava tradition, places Kavikarṇapūra in the (political) history of sixteenth‐century Bengal and Orissa as well as sketches his place in the early developments of the Caitanya Vaiṣṇava tradition (a topic more fully explored in Chapter 1). The chapter also reflects more generally on the nature of both his poetry and poetics, and highlights the way Kavikarṇapūra has so far been studied in modern scholarship.

Scatter 2

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Geoffrey Bennington
Keyword(s):  
Jacques Derrida ◽  
The Other ◽  
Carl Schmitt ◽  
Early Church ◽  
The Political ◽  
Church Fathers ◽  
Jean Bodin ◽  
Marsilius Of Padua ◽  
The One ◽  
Nuremberg Trials

Scatter 2 identifies politics as an object of perennial difficulty for philosophy—as recalcitrant to philosophical mastery as is philosophy’s traditional adversary, poetry. That difficulty makes it an attractive area of attention for any deconstructive approach to the tradition from which we inevitably inherit our language and our concepts. Scatter 2 pursues that deconstruction, often starting, and sometimes departing, from the work of Jacques Derrida, by attending to the concepts of sovereignty on the one hand, and democracy on the other. Part I follows the fate of a line from Book II of Homer’s Iliad, where Odysseus asserts that “the rule of many is no good thing, let there be one ruler, one king,” as it is quoted and misquoted, and progressively Christianized, by authors including Aristotle, Philo Judaeus, Suetonius, the early Church Fathers, Aquinas, Dante, Ockham, Marsilius of Padua, Jean Bodin, Etienne de la Boétie, up to Carl Schmitt and Erik Peterson, and even one of the defendants at the Nuremberg Trials, before being discussed by Derrida himself. Part II begins again, as it were, with Plato and Aristotle, and tracks the concept of democracy as it regularly impacts and tends to undermine that sovereignist tradition, and, more especially in detailed readings of Hobbes and Rousseau, develops a notion of “proto-democracy” as a possible name for the scatter that underlies and drives the political as such, and that will always prevent politics from achieving its aim of bringing itself to an end.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document