{"title":"A Sacrament of Intellectual Self-Gratification","authors":"A. Doja","doi":"10.3167/cs.2023.350102","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nAgamben claimed that the experience of language, as it is manifested in the oath, precedes and gives rise to religion, law and politics, and therefore should be seen as a crucial element of the human process. It is my contention to argue here that a particular aspect of Agamben's own language suffers from substantial and conceptual flaws and self-assertive opinions on language and oath. They may put in question his own engagement with the textual evidence and philosophical literature, which makes his own text self-recommending and self-gratifying. In addition, he relied on obscure authors and obsolete interpretations and he failed to engage the relevant issues in the relevant literature that are crucial to his argument. More importantly, Agamben's argument on a certain impotence of language offers little suggestion, except calling upon philosophical obfuscation, to break down the state of exception in the current post-modern condition and avoid the technical apparatuses of the sacrament of power that led first to oath, and then to religion, law and politics.","PeriodicalId":56154,"journal":{"name":"Critical Survey","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Critical Survey","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3167/cs.2023.350102","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LITERARY THEORY & CRITICISM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Agamben claimed that the experience of language, as it is manifested in the oath, precedes and gives rise to religion, law and politics, and therefore should be seen as a crucial element of the human process. It is my contention to argue here that a particular aspect of Agamben's own language suffers from substantial and conceptual flaws and self-assertive opinions on language and oath. They may put in question his own engagement with the textual evidence and philosophical literature, which makes his own text self-recommending and self-gratifying. In addition, he relied on obscure authors and obsolete interpretations and he failed to engage the relevant issues in the relevant literature that are crucial to his argument. More importantly, Agamben's argument on a certain impotence of language offers little suggestion, except calling upon philosophical obfuscation, to break down the state of exception in the current post-modern condition and avoid the technical apparatuses of the sacrament of power that led first to oath, and then to religion, law and politics.