Pastoral Power and Revolution: Beyond Secularization and Political Theology

Elettra Stimilli
{"title":"Pastoral Power and Revolution: Beyond Secularization and Political Theology","authors":"Elettra Stimilli","doi":"10.1177/02632764231203572","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"When stressing how ‘Christian pastoral power’ defined the specificity of ‘governmental power’, Foucault never explicitly acknowledged the German debate on modernity or theological-political issues. My hypothesis is that – whatever the actual reasons for this omission might be – this oversight is symptomatic of Foucault’s unique interpretation of the role of Christianity in Western culture and of his different approach to the theme of power. After analysing the positions of two of the leading exponents of the German debate, Karl Löwith and Carl Schmitt, the essay substantiates this hypothesis by looking at Foucault’s investigations of pastoral power. In particular, the essay aims to demonstrate how the latter’s apparent omissions are linked to Foucault’s challenge to two central questions in the 20th-century debate on modernity, namely: (1) the possibility of interpreting modern political revolutions as expressions of a linear and secularized vision of history; and (2) the centrality of the category of sovereignty in the definition of Western power.","PeriodicalId":227485,"journal":{"name":"Theory, Culture & Society","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Theory, Culture & Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/02632764231203572","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

When stressing how ‘Christian pastoral power’ defined the specificity of ‘governmental power’, Foucault never explicitly acknowledged the German debate on modernity or theological-political issues. My hypothesis is that – whatever the actual reasons for this omission might be – this oversight is symptomatic of Foucault’s unique interpretation of the role of Christianity in Western culture and of his different approach to the theme of power. After analysing the positions of two of the leading exponents of the German debate, Karl Löwith and Carl Schmitt, the essay substantiates this hypothesis by looking at Foucault’s investigations of pastoral power. In particular, the essay aims to demonstrate how the latter’s apparent omissions are linked to Foucault’s challenge to two central questions in the 20th-century debate on modernity, namely: (1) the possibility of interpreting modern political revolutions as expressions of a linear and secularized vision of history; and (2) the centrality of the category of sovereignty in the definition of Western power.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
牧师的权力与革命:超越世俗化和政治神学
在强调 "基督教牧师权力 "如何界定 "政府权力 "的特殊性时,福柯从未明确承认德国关于现代性或神学政治问题的辩论。我的假设是--无论这一疏忽的实际原因是什么--这一疏忽体现了福柯对基督教在西方文化中的作用的独特阐释,以及他对权力主题的不同态度。在分析了卡尔-勒维茨和卡尔-施密特这两位德国辩论的主要代表人物的立场之后,文章通过研究福柯对牧师权力的研究证实了这一假设。特别是,文章旨在说明后者明显的疏忽是如何与福柯对 20 世纪现代性辩论中两个核心问题的挑战联系在一起的,这两个问题是:(1) 将现代政治革命解释为线性和世俗化历史观的表达的可能性;(2) 主权范畴在西方权力定义中的核心地位。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
With and against Max Weber: A Conversation with Wendy Brown on Politics and Scholarship in Nihilistic Times Inheritance at the Limits Deep Time and Microtime: Anthropocene Temporalities and Silicon Valley’s Longtermist Scope The Antinomy of the Anthropocene: The Narrative of Enlightenment in Dipesh Chakrabarty’s Ecological Theory Vitalist Marxism: Georges Canguilhem and the Resistance of Life
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1