Sondra L. Hausner, D. Eck, J. Hawley, R. Mehrotra, J. A. Whitaker, Igor Mikeshin, S. Hillewaert, Chantal Tetreault, Emily Riley, Javier Jiménez-Royo, Josh Bullock, M. Guillot, C. Carter, Evgenia Fotiou, A. Clot, Essi Mäkelä, Andrés Felipe Agudelo, Diana Espírito Santo, K. Wirtz, Joana Martins, Jon Bialecki, J. Robbins, Richard Baxstrom
{"title":"State Legibility and Mind Legibility in the Original Political Society","authors":"Sondra L. Hausner, D. Eck, J. Hawley, R. Mehrotra, J. A. Whitaker, Igor Mikeshin, S. Hillewaert, Chantal Tetreault, Emily Riley, Javier Jiménez-Royo, Josh Bullock, M. Guillot, C. Carter, Evgenia Fotiou, A. Clot, Essi Mäkelä, Andrés Felipe Agudelo, Diana Espírito Santo, K. Wirtz, Joana Martins, Jon Bialecki, J. Robbins, Richard Baxstrom","doi":"10.3167/arrs.2021.120104","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In one of his last great provocations, Marshall Sahlins describes the ‘original political society’ as a society where supposedly ‘egalitarian’ relations between humans are subordinated to the government of metahuman beings. He argues that this government is ‘a state’, but what kind of state does he mean? Even if metahumans are hierarchically organized and have power over human beings, they lack two capacities commonly attributed to political states: systematic means to make populations legible and coercive means to identity the intentions of others. The nascent forms of state legibility and public mind reading that are present in Sahlins’s original political society are not unified and tied to particular agents. A discussion of the limitations of state and mind legibility points to the fundamental correlations between those two forms of legibility and their co-implication in whatever might be called ‘the state’.","PeriodicalId":42823,"journal":{"name":"Religion and Society-Advances in Research","volume":"16 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2021-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Religion and Society-Advances in Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3167/arrs.2021.120104","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"RELIGION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2
Abstract
In one of his last great provocations, Marshall Sahlins describes the ‘original political society’ as a society where supposedly ‘egalitarian’ relations between humans are subordinated to the government of metahuman beings. He argues that this government is ‘a state’, but what kind of state does he mean? Even if metahumans are hierarchically organized and have power over human beings, they lack two capacities commonly attributed to political states: systematic means to make populations legible and coercive means to identity the intentions of others. The nascent forms of state legibility and public mind reading that are present in Sahlins’s original political society are not unified and tied to particular agents. A discussion of the limitations of state and mind legibility points to the fundamental correlations between those two forms of legibility and their co-implication in whatever might be called ‘the state’.