{"title":"结论","authors":"G. Rae","doi":"10.3366/edinburgh/9781474445283.003.0009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This chapter provides an overview of the trajectory of the argument developed throughout the book and identifies what is insightful and innovative about the bio-juridical model; namely, that it challenges the binary ‘logic of versus’ underpinning the juridical and biopolitical models to instead propose a logic of contamination wherein apparently opposing concepts and ends meld into one another. In this respect, sovereign violence is no longer tied to a singular end, pre-defined purpose, and/or means-end logic, but is rather caught between multiple ends, none of which are clear-cut or predetermined.","PeriodicalId":319604,"journal":{"name":"Critiquing Sovereign Violence","volume":"3 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Conclusion\",\"authors\":\"G. Rae\",\"doi\":\"10.3366/edinburgh/9781474445283.003.0009\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This chapter provides an overview of the trajectory of the argument developed throughout the book and identifies what is insightful and innovative about the bio-juridical model; namely, that it challenges the binary ‘logic of versus’ underpinning the juridical and biopolitical models to instead propose a logic of contamination wherein apparently opposing concepts and ends meld into one another. In this respect, sovereign violence is no longer tied to a singular end, pre-defined purpose, and/or means-end logic, but is rather caught between multiple ends, none of which are clear-cut or predetermined.\",\"PeriodicalId\":319604,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Critiquing Sovereign Violence\",\"volume\":\"3 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Critiquing Sovereign Violence\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3366/edinburgh/9781474445283.003.0009\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Critiquing Sovereign Violence","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3366/edinburgh/9781474445283.003.0009","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
This chapter provides an overview of the trajectory of the argument developed throughout the book and identifies what is insightful and innovative about the bio-juridical model; namely, that it challenges the binary ‘logic of versus’ underpinning the juridical and biopolitical models to instead propose a logic of contamination wherein apparently opposing concepts and ends meld into one another. In this respect, sovereign violence is no longer tied to a singular end, pre-defined purpose, and/or means-end logic, but is rather caught between multiple ends, none of which are clear-cut or predetermined.