Pub Date : 2000-04-01DOI: 10.1080/14797580009367192
Richard Beardsworth
Abstract By considering the way in which the mechanism of the scapegoat in René Girard's work is predicated on a phenomenal and anthropic understanding of violence, the following shows how Girard's anthropological conception of religion determines and limits from the beginning relations between the violent and the nonviolent and the phenomenal and the nonphenornenal. This conception is then inscribed within a larger economy of violence that opens up Girard's account of victimization and sacrifice to wider determinations. Important distinctions are made along the way between the human sciences, religion, ethics and philosophy. If the work of Jacques Derrida in particular and deconstruction in general permit this widening in this article, I then argue however that such concepts as originary violence also short‐circuit the differentiations, with which we are concerned, to address, with and beyond Girard, a radical ethics of the lesser violence.
{"title":"Logics of violence: Religion and the practice of philosophy","authors":"Richard Beardsworth","doi":"10.1080/14797580009367192","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14797580009367192","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract By considering the way in which the mechanism of the scapegoat in René Girard's work is predicated on a phenomenal and anthropic understanding of violence, the following shows how Girard's anthropological conception of religion determines and limits from the beginning relations between the violent and the nonviolent and the phenomenal and the nonphenornenal. This conception is then inscribed within a larger economy of violence that opens up Girard's account of victimization and sacrifice to wider determinations. Important distinctions are made along the way between the human sciences, religion, ethics and philosophy. If the work of Jacques Derrida in particular and deconstruction in general permit this widening in this article, I then argue however that such concepts as originary violence also short‐circuit the differentiations, with which we are concerned, to address, with and beyond Girard, a radical ethics of the lesser violence.","PeriodicalId":296129,"journal":{"name":"Cultural Values","volume":"97 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2000-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"128306895","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2000-04-01DOI: 10.1080/14797580009367193
P. Goodchild
Abstract The relation between truth and violence is explored through the logic of sacrifice presented in the Book of Job. Job, as an arbitrary sacrificial victim, learns the truth of the violence perpetrated against him. Such violence is also shown to be constitutive of Western reasoning, including its practices of the truth.
{"title":"The logic of sacrifice in the book of job: Philosophy and the practice of religion","authors":"P. Goodchild","doi":"10.1080/14797580009367193","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14797580009367193","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The relation between truth and violence is explored through the logic of sacrifice presented in the Book of Job. Job, as an arbitrary sacrificial victim, learns the truth of the violence perpetrated against him. Such violence is also shown to be constitutive of Western reasoning, including its practices of the truth.","PeriodicalId":296129,"journal":{"name":"Cultural Values","volume":"4 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2000-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"128926883","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2000-04-01DOI: 10.1080/14797580009367198
I. Devisch
Abstract This essay explores Jean‐Luc Nancy's rethinking of political space in terms of an ontological ‘being‐with’. It elucidates how Nancy's thinking of community emerges out of the French philosopher's reworking of Heidegger's crucial notion of Mitsein. For Nancy, although Heidegger argues that Dasein is always already also Mitsein, Mitsein is nonetheless also occluded by the priority accorded to Dasein. The consequences for the way in which community or the space of the political is configured are profound since traditional conceptions of the subject of community thus remain unreconstructed. Nancy however does reconstruct community by emphasising that the primal ontological conditions of community are not conceived as the One, the Other or the We, but as the ‘with’, ‘relationality’, and the ‘between’. The question of being (Seinsfrage) thereby becomes the question of being‐with (Mitseinsfrage).
{"title":"A trembling voice in the desert: Jean‐Luc Nancy's rethinking of the space of the political","authors":"I. Devisch","doi":"10.1080/14797580009367198","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14797580009367198","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This essay explores Jean‐Luc Nancy's rethinking of political space in terms of an ontological ‘being‐with’. It elucidates how Nancy's thinking of community emerges out of the French philosopher's reworking of Heidegger's crucial notion of Mitsein. For Nancy, although Heidegger argues that Dasein is always already also Mitsein, Mitsein is nonetheless also occluded by the priority accorded to Dasein. The consequences for the way in which community or the space of the political is configured are profound since traditional conceptions of the subject of community thus remain unreconstructed. Nancy however does reconstruct community by emphasising that the primal ontological conditions of community are not conceived as the One, the Other or the We, but as the ‘with’, ‘relationality’, and the ‘between’. The question of being (Seinsfrage) thereby becomes the question of being‐with (Mitseinsfrage).","PeriodicalId":296129,"journal":{"name":"Cultural Values","volume":"42 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2000-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"125327533","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2000-04-01DOI: 10.1080/14797580009367196
P. Anderson
Abstract This essay explores the theme of sexual difference in relation to sacrifice by contrasting Girard's account of mimetic desire and cultural violence with Kristeva's extensive reflections on allied themes. Inspired by Reineke's critique of Girard the object of the paper is to generate discussion concerning the ethical implications of recognizing the play of sexual difference in any theory of sacrifice. Specifically it aims to contribute towards a subversion of the sexually specific violence of patriarchy.
{"title":"Sacrificed lives: Mimetic desire, sexual difference and murder","authors":"P. Anderson","doi":"10.1080/14797580009367196","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14797580009367196","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This essay explores the theme of sexual difference in relation to sacrifice by contrasting Girard's account of mimetic desire and cultural violence with Kristeva's extensive reflections on allied themes. Inspired by Reineke's critique of Girard the object of the paper is to generate discussion concerning the ethical implications of recognizing the play of sexual difference in any theory of sacrifice. Specifically it aims to contribute towards a subversion of the sexually specific violence of patriarchy.","PeriodicalId":296129,"journal":{"name":"Cultural Values","volume":"6 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2000-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"124717519","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2000-04-01DOI: 10.1080/14797580009367197
P. Fletcher
Abstract This paper responds to the violence inherent in modern ‘formal’ conceptions of justice which sever the ‘cultural’ from the ‘political’. As a counterpoint to this dominant rendering of justice the paper explores an alternate justice whose character is typified by the disposition and exigencies of the viscera.
{"title":"Making bowels move: Justice without the limits of reason alone","authors":"P. Fletcher","doi":"10.1080/14797580009367197","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14797580009367197","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This paper responds to the violence inherent in modern ‘formal’ conceptions of justice which sever the ‘cultural’ from the ‘political’. As a counterpoint to this dominant rendering of justice the paper explores an alternate justice whose character is typified by the disposition and exigencies of the viscera.","PeriodicalId":296129,"journal":{"name":"Cultural Values","volume":"6 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2000-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"114794301","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2000-04-01DOI: 10.1080/14797580009367194
C. Davis
Abstract This paper derives from an interest in murder. This interest began through reading fictional narratives which ceaselessly stage and restage scenes of murder; but it has also become clear that a range of theoretical texts are no less preoccupied with the basic question, ‘Why kill?’ (see Davis, 2000). In particular, the three theorists I shall discuss here, Freud, Girard and Levinas, directly address the question of murder, its causes and consequences. In each case, the theoretical question turns out to depend upon a minimal core narrative in which the stakes of murder are crystallized; rival theoretical accounts are thus also bound up in a competition of stories. As this paper traces a common concern from Freud's Totem and Taboo, through Girard's La Violence et le sacré, to Levinas's Totalité et infini, the question ‘Why kill?’ gets entangled with the dynamics of storytelling and the issue of what it means to do theory.
{"title":"Fathers, others: The sacrificial victim in Freud, Girard, and Levinas","authors":"C. Davis","doi":"10.1080/14797580009367194","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14797580009367194","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This paper derives from an interest in murder. This interest began through reading fictional narratives which ceaselessly stage and restage scenes of murder; but it has also become clear that a range of theoretical texts are no less preoccupied with the basic question, ‘Why kill?’ (see Davis, 2000). In particular, the three theorists I shall discuss here, Freud, Girard and Levinas, directly address the question of murder, its causes and consequences. In each case, the theoretical question turns out to depend upon a minimal core narrative in which the stakes of murder are crystallized; rival theoretical accounts are thus also bound up in a competition of stories. As this paper traces a common concern from Freud's Totem and Taboo, through Girard's La Violence et le sacré, to Levinas's Totalité et infini, the question ‘Why kill?’ gets entangled with the dynamics of storytelling and the issue of what it means to do theory.","PeriodicalId":296129,"journal":{"name":"Cultural Values","volume":"20 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2000-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"121333143","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2000-04-01DOI: 10.1080/14797580009367195
G. Flood
Abstract While Ricoeur wishes to relate the concept of narrative to identity and ethics, Girard sees the development of ethical conscience in myth. This paper examines this difference, arguing that the implicitly universal human nature that he posits, driven by mimetic desire, compromises subjectivity as narrative identity, as developed in Ricoeur's work. This paper attempts to read Girard alongside Ricoeur, in order to suggest that there is a problematic tension implicit in Guard's work between subjectivity and drive. To do this, I describe Ricoeur's understanding of mimesis and how this is related to truth and narrative identity. Then turning to Girard, I show how his linking of violence to truth repudiates the possibility of the attestation of truth as subjectivity.
{"title":"Mimesis, narrative and subjectivity in the work of Girard and Ricoeur","authors":"G. Flood","doi":"10.1080/14797580009367195","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14797580009367195","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract While Ricoeur wishes to relate the concept of narrative to identity and ethics, Girard sees the development of ethical conscience in myth. This paper examines this difference, arguing that the implicitly universal human nature that he posits, driven by mimetic desire, compromises subjectivity as narrative identity, as developed in Ricoeur's work. This paper attempts to read Girard alongside Ricoeur, in order to suggest that there is a problematic tension implicit in Guard's work between subjectivity and drive. To do this, I describe Ricoeur's understanding of mimesis and how this is related to truth and narrative identity. Then turning to Girard, I show how his linking of violence to truth repudiates the possibility of the attestation of truth as subjectivity.","PeriodicalId":296129,"journal":{"name":"Cultural Values","volume":"87 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2000-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"121336845","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2000-01-01DOI: 10.1080/14797580009367189
Michael Payne
Although Jacques Derrida, not Michel Foucault, is the principal subject of this paper, I want to begin with Foucault's brilliantly succinct definition of his project as 'that which is susceptible of introducing a significant difference in the field of knowledge, at the cost of a certain difficulty for the author and the reader, with, however, the eventual recompense of a certain pleasure, that is to say of access to another figure of truth' (Foucault, 1997, p. vii). I cite this definition because it directly contradicts a scandalously mistaken representation of the work of Foucault and Derrida. That mistaken notion is that their work sets out to undermine and discredit truth, value, aesthetic pleasure, and ethically responsible political action. In fact, precisely the opposite is the case. Both Foucault and Derrida relentlessly and systematically labour to establish a critically vital foundation for truth, value, meaning, pleasure, and moral action. Far from denying meaning in language, they assert that language is replete with meaning. They are likewise champions of truth, value, pleasure, and morality when these are reflective, responsible, and critically grounded (see particularly Norris, 1987, pp. 54-6,150-5). In order to proceed with my principal claim, which is, that truth not only survives but flourishes after Derrida, I must briefly distinguish deconstruction and poststructuralism from postmodernism, with which they are often mistakenly identified. Postmodernism is a cultural style, like classicism and romanticism; and like those styles, it can never be securely defined, though it can be described. A place to start is with modernism, which is given a useful definition by James Joyce's Stephen Dedalus in A Portrait of an Artist as a Young Man, for whom the essential characteristic of works of modern art is unity. For him aesthetic unity consists in the integrity of the various parts of the aesthetic object, the eventual consonance of all momentarily apparent discords, and the ultimate clarity of a work's purpose or meaning. In different degrees and in different ways, postmodernism and poststructuralism call this ideological aesthetic of modernism into question. Poststructuralism works within the ideology of modernism, calling into question its presuppositions, examining the grounds of truth, meaning, and value in the interest of providing truth, meaning, and value with a more stable
{"title":"The survival of truth after Derrida","authors":"Michael Payne","doi":"10.1080/14797580009367189","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14797580009367189","url":null,"abstract":"Although Jacques Derrida, not Michel Foucault, is the principal subject of this paper, I want to begin with Foucault's brilliantly succinct definition of his project as 'that which is susceptible of introducing a significant difference in the field of knowledge, at the cost of a certain difficulty for the author and the reader, with, however, the eventual recompense of a certain pleasure, that is to say of access to another figure of truth' (Foucault, 1997, p. vii). I cite this definition because it directly contradicts a scandalously mistaken representation of the work of Foucault and Derrida. That mistaken notion is that their work sets out to undermine and discredit truth, value, aesthetic pleasure, and ethically responsible political action. In fact, precisely the opposite is the case. Both Foucault and Derrida relentlessly and systematically labour to establish a critically vital foundation for truth, value, meaning, pleasure, and moral action. Far from denying meaning in language, they assert that language is replete with meaning. They are likewise champions of truth, value, pleasure, and morality when these are reflective, responsible, and critically grounded (see particularly Norris, 1987, pp. 54-6,150-5). In order to proceed with my principal claim, which is, that truth not only survives but flourishes after Derrida, I must briefly distinguish deconstruction and poststructuralism from postmodernism, with which they are often mistakenly identified. Postmodernism is a cultural style, like classicism and romanticism; and like those styles, it can never be securely defined, though it can be described. A place to start is with modernism, which is given a useful definition by James Joyce's Stephen Dedalus in A Portrait of an Artist as a Young Man, for whom the essential characteristic of works of modern art is unity. For him aesthetic unity consists in the integrity of the various parts of the aesthetic object, the eventual consonance of all momentarily apparent discords, and the ultimate clarity of a work's purpose or meaning. In different degrees and in different ways, postmodernism and poststructuralism call this ideological aesthetic of modernism into question. Poststructuralism works within the ideology of modernism, calling into question its presuppositions, examining the grounds of truth, meaning, and value in the interest of providing truth, meaning, and value with a more stable","PeriodicalId":296129,"journal":{"name":"Cultural Values","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2000-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"130483642","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2000-01-01DOI: 10.1080/14797580009367187
L. Barshack
Abstract It is argued that ideals emerge in the course of the individuation‐separation process, preserving the narcissism of primary Thingness. Ideals form an essential part of social structure, as opposed to communitas, where individuation is suspended. The anthropological distinction between social structure and communitas is reformulated in psychoanalytic terms. Structure and communitas are shown to correspond to two alternative organizations of narcissism. Ideals and myths figure among the manifestations of the narcissism of structure. In the last section, certain explanations of the discourse of ideals are drawn from the preceding account. While the premises of the following reflections are broadly Kleinian, Lacanian concepts are supplemented, not on the basis of any definite synthesis but towards a piecemeal reconciliation.
{"title":"The subject of ideals","authors":"L. Barshack","doi":"10.1080/14797580009367187","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14797580009367187","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract It is argued that ideals emerge in the course of the individuation‐separation process, preserving the narcissism of primary Thingness. Ideals form an essential part of social structure, as opposed to communitas, where individuation is suspended. The anthropological distinction between social structure and communitas is reformulated in psychoanalytic terms. Structure and communitas are shown to correspond to two alternative organizations of narcissism. Ideals and myths figure among the manifestations of the narcissism of structure. In the last section, certain explanations of the discourse of ideals are drawn from the preceding account. While the premises of the following reflections are broadly Kleinian, Lacanian concepts are supplemented, not on the basis of any definite synthesis but towards a piecemeal reconciliation.","PeriodicalId":296129,"journal":{"name":"Cultural Values","volume":"19 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2000-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"125605472","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2000-01-01DOI: 10.1080/14797580009367183
C. Jenks, Tiago Neves
Abstract This paper focuses on the concept of the flâneur, deriving largely from the works of Baudelaire and Walter Benjamin, and attempts to reveal its contemporary relevance for sociological practice. The flâneur is treated as an instructive metaphor for the sociologist's relationship with modernity and urban life, and therefore as providing insight into the social, historical and theoretical contexts for the analysis of the world today. More than this, the idea of the flâneur is treated as highly instructive of research strategies confronting urban life, namely ethnography. The paper seeks to expose a critical space between ‘realist’ and ‘textual’ ethnographies and provide a locus for the discussion of associated methodological problems. A burgeoning literature and tradition of work in this area is examined which will also be of interest to the sociological theorist.
{"title":"A walk on the wild side: Urban ethnography meets the Flâneur","authors":"C. Jenks, Tiago Neves","doi":"10.1080/14797580009367183","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14797580009367183","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This paper focuses on the concept of the flâneur, deriving largely from the works of Baudelaire and Walter Benjamin, and attempts to reveal its contemporary relevance for sociological practice. The flâneur is treated as an instructive metaphor for the sociologist's relationship with modernity and urban life, and therefore as providing insight into the social, historical and theoretical contexts for the analysis of the world today. More than this, the idea of the flâneur is treated as highly instructive of research strategies confronting urban life, namely ethnography. The paper seeks to expose a critical space between ‘realist’ and ‘textual’ ethnographies and provide a locus for the discussion of associated methodological problems. A burgeoning literature and tradition of work in this area is examined which will also be of interest to the sociological theorist.","PeriodicalId":296129,"journal":{"name":"Cultural Values","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2000-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"126012478","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：