DOCSLIB.ORG

The University of Chicago Political Freedom Between

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The University of Chicago Political Freedom Between THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO POLITICAL FREEDOM BETWEEN ARENDT AND FOUCAULT A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF THE DIVISION OF THE SOCIAL SCIENCES IN CANDIDACY FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY JOHN U. NEF COMMITTEE ON SOCIAL THOUGHT BY DAWN HERRERA HELPHAND CHICAGO, ILLINOIS JUNE 2018 TABLE OF CONTENTS Acknowledgments iii Abstract v Chapter One: Liberal Conceptions of Political Freedom: Property, Sovereignty, State 1 Chapter Two: Freedom Between Arendt and Foucault: Problematics and Possibilities 48 Chapter Three: Freedom as Practice 118 Chapter Four: The Free Subject in Play 153 Chapter Five: State, Race, Violence 202 Chapter Six: Freedom as Event 248 ii I owe an immense debt of gratitude to the teachers, mentors and friends who have guided me in the completion of this project. I would like to thank my Chair, Nathan Tarcov, for his trust in my capacity, his steadying hand when I myself doubted it, and for the care he has taken with my work; Patchen Markell, whose subtle insight and breadth of knowledge, have been matched only by his profound generosity; and Bernard Harcourt, who from the beginning has directed me straight to the heart of the matter and encouraged me to embrace my vision as my own. Thank you all for challenging and supporting me. I am truly fortunate to have had the opportunity to work with you: your friendship and advice are an inestimable gift. Thank you to the Committee on Social Thought, for providing my colleagues and I with that rarest, most precious scholarly resource: space to think. For helping me find my footing there I am deeply indebted to the late Paul Friedrich, a great soul and a dear friend. Special thanks are due to Anne Gamboa, for all these years of help and good humor—it made a world of difference to me. Thanks also to all of my wonderful teachers at Chicago, and especially to Linda Zerilli, Lauren Berlant and Arnold Davidson, whose rigorous, generative seminars shaped this work, and to John McCormick, whose acuity in advising my master’s thesis enabled it. This project first germinated at Brown University. I am forever grateful to Lewis Gordon and Linda Martín Alcoff, who handed me the seeds, and to Suzanne Oboler, who put a spade in my hand and told me where to look for water. I am grateful to the Woodrow Wilson National Fellowship Foundation and the Mellon Fellows Program: the Mellon Mays Undergraduate Fellowship gave me the confidence and motivation to pursue a graduate degree, and the Dissertation Completion Fellowship gave me the means to iii complete it. I also gratefully acknowledge the support of the University of Chicago’s Master of Arts Program in the Humanities—a crucial bridge on a long road. A number of friends and colleagues have contributed substantially to my thinking. In particular I would like to thank Carly Lane, David Gutherz, Hadji Bakara, Stephen Haswell Todd, Tejas Parasher and Daniel Schultz for their insights and recommendations. Thanks are due to the Social Thought Dissertation Workgroup, and the University of Chicago’s Political Theory Workshop, Contemporary European Philosophy Workshop, Gender and Sexuality Studies Workshop, and Social Thought Colloquium, as well as the Johns Hopkins University Humanities Center Graduate Conference, which all assisted in my working through of this material. Further thanks to Bernard for hosting informal but highly productive working dinners, and to the cohort of students who made them such a delight. These meetings not only pushed my writing forward, but showed me collegiality in its highest form, and I am honored to have taken part. Finally, thank you to my family. To my first and best teacher, my mother, Socorro Herrera, thank you for giving us everything and more, for clearing the path, for showing me what is possible and for the incredible strength of your love. To Kevin Herrera, thank you for keeping me honest and making me laugh, always. And to Jesse Davila and Isamari Davila, thank you for sharing with me your brightness and promise. Thank you, Selah and Cyrus—for your patience and for my joy. To Ben, my first interlocutor and happiest companion, my refuge, support and inspiration—I owe you everything, and dedicate this work to you. iv ABSTRACT In the academy and in popular discourse, freedom is the prevailing political ideal of our age. Due to this normative and rhetorical primacy, we must continually work to understand what we mean when we say "freedom," and what implications it has for our individual and collective lives. My dissertation argues that our predominant understanding of freedom, largely derived from liberal political philosophy, is at odds with the form of life that democracy requires. I read Hannah Arendt and Michel Foucault to develop their critiques of this conception of freedom and its relevant normative framework, and place into dialogue the conceptions of political freedom legible in their work. In doing so, I contribute to the conceptual elaboration of a freedom that is experienced as political engagement. Chapter 1 of my dissertation surveys the liberal philosophical tradition to identify a concept of liberal political freedom. Counterposing traditional binaries (positive and negative liberty, natural rights and constructivism, libertarianism and welfarism), I find that most liberal theories of freedom share three features: political freedom is a property of the subject; the subject of freedom is sovereign; and freedom is a state of being, guaranteed by the state. These assumptions constitute an implicit normative paradigm, and provide a foil against which we can better view the conceptions of freedom legible in the work of Arendt and Foucault. In chapter 2, I reconstruct freedom as Arendt and Foucault understood it—as something one does—and elaborate their critiques of the ideal of sovereignty and of the state as freedom’s guarantor by threat of violence. I consider how these theorists have been read in contemporary critical and political theory, and problems that typify their reception. In contrast to the liberal v paradigm of “property, sovereignty, state” I posit that Foucault and Arendt share a conception of freedom as a practice; of the subject of freedom in play; and of freedom as an event. Chapters 3 through 5 elaborate this paradigm and respond to key debates in the secondary literature. In chapter 3 I argue that a practice must include both active and reflective components. Refuting readings that characterize Foucault as “ethical” and Arendt “political” in their approaches to institutions and collectivities, I find that both of their understandings of freedom require concerted ethical and political engagement, and consider the relation between the two. Chapter 4 responds to the polemics surrounding both authors’ refusal to posit an essentialized (sovereign) subject and the crisis of normativity engendered by that refusal. A recognizable figure of the free subject is important for our political imaginary: I posit play as an alternative paradigm of free subjectivity, legible in the work of Foucault and Arendt. I reconstruct the concept of play through philosophy and the social sciences, arguing that it uniquely exemplifies an activity with immanent (rather than transcendentally given) norms. I then describe how in Arendt and Foucault’s accounts of freedom the free individual is always “in play.” This figure presents a compelling challenge to the sovereign subject of freedom, critiqued by both authors as an impossible and antidemocratic ideal. Chapters 5 and 6 challenge the dual role of “state” in liberal theory. In chapter 5, I examine the complex relationship between state, violence, and race in the authors’ historical critiques and political engagements. For both authors, race-thinking represents a historical scandal of domination, which they analyze with respect to Nazi (national socialist) totalitarianism. In light vi of their genealogical analyses, race appears as an indelible scandal for the State conceived as the protective agent of individual freedom. The possibilities of freedom in their respective understandings, and its relation to political institutions, must be thought with respect to this complex problematic. Finally, contesting the idea of freedom as a state of being, I engage contemporary continental philosophical theories of the event to examine, in abstract terms, the difference it might make to think of freedom as an event. Locating the stakes of the argument in the authors’ critiques of the bureaucratic administration of life, I consider how shift to understanding political freedom as an event in time might recast our ideal conception of political institutions. Methodologically, my research is best described as critical normative theory. While my primary authors are often considered standard bearers of Continental philosophy, my approach is largely analytic: I work by closely examining the meaning of concepts and considering how they are brought to bear on human actions. In doing so, I draw on diverse bodies of scholarly literature: For example, my work on play in chapter 4 elaborates the concept through a juxtaposition of Kantian aesthetic theory, ordinary language philosophy, psychology, sociology and cultural anthropology. Throughout the dissertation, I am strongly committed to advancing conversations across disciplinary lines and moving beyond departmental silos to grapple with fundamental questions. We are living through a strange and challenging political moment, as the threats to our life in common grow increasingly present, increasingly clear. Now more than ever, we must carefully vii consider what animates, to borrow a term from Montesquieu, the spirit of our laws. Foucauldian and Arendtian critique suggest that the problems of contemporary democracy are rooted deeply in our form of life, and have inspired me to look closely at our foremost political value, freedom. Thinking freedom another way opens new horizons for rethinking what “rule of the people” as a lived reality might require. viii CHAPTER ONE LIBERAL CONCEPTIONS OF POLITICAL FREEDOM: PROPERTY, SOVEREIGNTY, STATE This chapter opens a critical evaluation of how political freedom is understood in liberal theories of politics.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Mary Mccarthy
    Mary McCarthy: Manuscripts for in the Manuscript Collection at the Harry Ransom Humanities Research Center Descriptive Summary Creator: McCarthy, Mary, 1912-1989 Title: Mary McCarthy, Manuscripts for The Group Dates: 1953-1964 Extent: 2 boxes, 1 galley folder (.63 linear feet) Abstract: The Ransom Center’s holdings for Mary McCarthy comprise her draft chapters, final manuscript, and galley proofs for the novel The Group . RLIN Record #: TXRC05-A10006 Language: English . Access: Open for research Administrative Information Acquisition: Purchase, 1968 (R4493) Processed by: Bob Taylor, 2003 Repository: The University of Texas at Austin, Harry Ransom Humanities Research Center McCarthy, Mary, 1912-1989 Biographical Sketch Born in Seattle on June 21, 1912, Mary McCarthy was the eldest of four children born to Roy and Therese McCarthy. Orphaned upon their parents’ deaths in the flu epidemic of 1918, Mary and her brothers eventually found refuge with their maternal grandparents in Seattle. Following her graduation from Vassar College in 1933, McCarthy, intending to pursue a literary career, moved to New York City, where she soon attracted attention for her essays and dramatic criticism. In the late 1930s she began to write short stories, several of which served as the nucleus of her first novel, The Company She Keeps, published in 1942. As one of the major figures in contemporary American cultural and political thought, Mary McCarthy wrote widely in fiction( The Oasis, Cast a Cold Eye, The Groves of Academe ), theater criticism( Mary McCarthy’s Theatre Chronicles, 1937-1962 ), memoir( Memories of a Catholic Girlhood and How I Grew ), and broad-ranging commentary( Venice Observed and The Mask of State: Watergate Portraits ).
    [Show full text]
  • Uyghur Dispossession, Culture Work and Terror Capitalism in a Chinese Global City Darren T. Byler a Dissertati
    Spirit Breaking: Uyghur Dispossession, Culture Work and Terror Capitalism in a Chinese Global City Darren T. Byler A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy University of Washington 2018 Reading Committee: Sasha Su-Ling Welland, Chair Ann Anagnost Stevan Harrell Danny Hoffman Program Authorized to Offer Degree: Anthropology ©Copyright 2018 Darren T. Byler University of Washington Abstract Spirit Breaking: Uyghur Dispossession, Culture Work and Terror Capitalism in a Chinese Global City Darren T. Byler Chair of the Supervisory Committee: Sasha Su-Ling Welland, Department of Gender, Women, and Sexuality Studies This study argues that Uyghurs, a Turkic-Muslim group in contemporary Northwest China, and the city of Ürümchi have become the object of what the study names “terror capitalism.” This argument is supported by evidence of both the way state-directed economic investment and security infrastructures (pass-book systems, webs of technological surveillance, urban cleansing processes and mass internment camps) have shaped self-representation among Uyghur migrants and Han settlers in the city. It analyzes these human engineering and urban planning projects and the way their effects are contested in new media, film, television, photography and literature. It finds that this form of capitalist production utilizes the discourse of terror to justify state investment in a wide array of policing and social engineering systems that employs millions of state security workers. The project also presents a theoretical model for understanding how Uyghurs use cultural production to both build and refuse the development of this new economic formation and accompanying forms of gendered, ethno-racial violence.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Judgment and Imagination in Habermas's Theory of Law Thomas Fossen Institute for Philosophy Leiden University the Final Ve
    Judgment and Imagination in Habermas’s Theory of Law Thomas Fossen Institute for Philosophy Leiden University The final version of this paper was published in Philosophy & Social Criticism: psc.sagepub.com/cgi/doi/10.1177/0191453714566485 Abstract: Recent debates in political theory display a renewed interest in the problem of judgment. This article critically examines the different senses of judgment that are at play in Jürgen Habermas’s theory of law. The paper offers (a) a new critical reading of Habermas’s account of the legitimacy of law, and (b) a revisionary interpretation of the reconstructive approach to political theory that underpins it. Both of these are instrumental to (c) an understanding of what is involved in judging the legitimacy of law that is richer than has been recognized thus far by both critics and defenders of Habermas. Keywords: Habermas, law, legitimacy, judgment, imagination, reconstruction, communicative action, deliberative democracy, agonistic politics Acknowledgments: I am grateful to Joel Anderson, Bert van den Brink, and Patchen Markell for critical discussions and inspiration, and I’ve also benefited from feedback from Wout Cornelissen, J.J. McFadden, Daniel Gaus, David Owen, Martine Prange, Herman Siemens, an anonymous referee, and an audience at the Dutch Research School for Practical Philosophy, especially discussant Stefan Rummens. Thanks also to Ciarán Ó Faoláin for his careful copy-editing. Work on this paper was funded by a grant from the Dutch Organization for Scientific Research (NWO), entitled “Between Agonism and Deliberation: Rethinking Conflict and its Relation to Law in Political Philosophy.” 1 1. Introduction What is involved in judging the legitimacy of law? Much of the philosophical debate about legitimacy focuses on the content and justification of principles of legitimacy in light of which law (or political authority more broadly) ought to be considered legitimate or illegitimate.
    [Show full text]
  • MARXIST a Discussion Journal
    PRICE: TWO SHILLINGS AND SIXPENCE .The MARXIST A Discussion Journal e The Wilson Screw on the Workers e The· Labour Party and Socialism e The International Situation in 1966 Vol. 1 Number 1 NoV'einber-December, 1966 Vol. 1 No. 1 NOVEMBER-DECEMBER, 1966 THE MARXIST A Discussion Journal IN THIS ISSUE Our Purpose this page The Marxist is published six times a year, inJanuary, March, The Wilson Screw on the Workers 5 May, July, September and November. Contributions intended by Reg Birch for publication should reach the editorial office by the first of the month preceding publication. The International Si.tuation in 1966 9 The Labour Party and Socialism 21 EDITORIAL COMMITTEE by Mike Faulkner Reg Birch Ewan MacColl Mike Faulkner Sam Nelson Jim Kean Colin Penn Tom Hill Ted Roycraft OUR PURPOSE VAST CHANGES are taking place in the world, sweeping away old Editorial address: political landmarks. Among those most affected are the people of Britain. Flat 4, 53 Shepherds Hi 11, The United States no longer occupies the unchallenged position it held London, N.6. at the end of the second world war. NATO is no longer a cohesive alliance, and the divisions in the West grow more marked as France strengthens Manager: Mike Faulkner 9-er leadership of the forces resisting the subordination of European capitalism to Amer.i:can. Price: 2s.6d. (Js. post paid) Annual Subscription 11s. 6d. post paid Divisions within the socialist world raise issues which go to the very in the United Kingdom. root of socialist principles and practice. Soviet policy increasingly emphasises the finding of C<Jmmon ground with the United States.
    [Show full text]
  • The Moment Has Passed Power After Arendt
    4 THE MOMENT HAS PASSED Power after Arendt Patchen Markell “America’s Tahrir Moment”: that’s the title of an Adbusters blog entry from early September 2011. Nobody Can Predict the Moment of Revolution: the title of a short documentary video about Occupy Wall Street produced by some of its participants. “Transforming Occupy Wall Street from a Moment to a Movement”: the headline of a widely circulated article urging the occupiers to organize themselves behind a series of specific progressive demands.1 It’s not hard to understand the appeal of the language of the “moment” as a way of capturing the political rhythms of the past two years, whether in Sidi Bouzid, Oakland, Cairo, London, or lower Manhattan. Against the background of a feeling of political stuckness, of being in a rut you can’t see how to break out of, or of being subject to something—whether it’s an authoritarian dynasty or an economic system—that you feel powerless to contest, political aspiration can take the form of the desire for a moment of radical transformation, of the sudden appearance of new possibilities. Against the same background, promising moments can prove disappoint- ing precisely in their momentariness as old patterns and entrenched powers reassert themselves. Yet the notion of politics as a matter of the sudden and dramatic interruption of ordinary life, whose transformative effects must somehow be made durable without sacrificing what is radical and new in them, comes with significant costs. It has helped to anchor problematic conceptions of the authority of the political theorist: problematic because they fit poorly with the antihierarchical political principles in whose name they are often articulated and problematic because they help to reproduce 113 114 Patchen Markell subtly disempowering pictures of the very things—political power and political agency—that theory often promises to secure.
    [Show full text]
  • Tu 3–5 Pm Or by Appointment HANNAH
    Patchen Markell 2-8057, [email protected] Pick Hall 412 Office hours: Tu 3–5 pm or by appointment HANNAH ARENDT’S THE HUMAN CONDITION Political Science 24500 / 34500 / Fundamentals 22212 Spring Quarter 2014 Mondays, 1:30–4:20 pm Wieboldt 408 This seminar will be devoted to a reading of Hannah Arendt’s The Human Condition (1958), one of the most influential works of political theory written in the twentieth century. Topics include: the meaning and function of Arendt’s distinctions among “public,” “private” and “social” and among “labor,” “work,” and “action”; the significance and prospects of human activity, including especially political activity, in modernity; the relation between philosophy and politics in and beyond Athens; the significance of the scientific revolution for modernity; the meanings of work, leisure, and consumption in postwar capitalism; the nature and basis of political power and freedom; the relations between art and politics; and many others. In addition to The Human Condition, we’ll read some supplementary material, which includes work by some of the thinkers with whom Arendt was more or less explicitly in conversation; work by other writers from her era that will help us to situate Arendt in the larger contexts of twentieth-century intellectual life; and more recent writing that will give us different angles on some of the issues in Arendt’s book. This is a limited-enrollment, by-consent seminar, open to advanced undergraduates and to graduate students; in the event of a scarcity of places, some priority may be given to undergraduates. TEXTS: The primary text for the course is Hannah Arendt, The Human Condition (Chicago, 1958, 2nd ed.
    [Show full text]
  • Mary Mccarthy
    ANALYSIS The Group (1963) Mary McCarthy (1912-1989) "A kind of compendious history of the faith in progress of the nineteen-thirties and forties as reflected in the behavior and notions of [eight] young women--college graduates of the year 1933.... No male consciousness is present in the book; through these eight points of view, all feminine, all consciously enlightened, are refracted, as if from a series of pretty prisms, all the novel ideas of the period concerning sex, politics, economics, architecture, city-planning, house-keeping, child-bearing, interior decoration, and art. It is a crazy quilt of cliches, platitudes, and idees recues. Yet the book is not meant to be a joke or even a satire, exactly, but a 'true history' of the times despite the angle or angles of distortion." Mary McCarthy Application for Guggenheim grant (1959) "No one in the know likes the book, and I dread what will happen to it in the New York Times Book Review.... I've now read it through, and in my usual see-sawing, indecisive way have formed two opinions: (1) bad, that it is a very labored, somehow silly Vassar affair... (2) good, a kind of clearness and innocence, trying to be kind to the characters--one feels she often made them dull so as not to resemble any of her real class-mates.... I doubt if she feels it's much of a masterpiece, still the excitement of a first commercial success is intoxicating." Robert Lowell Letter to Elizabeth Bishop (12 August 1963) "In her persistently reasonable, acutely amused way, Miss McCarthy knows everything about these girls.
    [Show full text]
  • Neoliberalism's Uneven Revolution: Reflections on Wendy Brown's Undoing the Demos
    Neoliberalism's Uneven Revolution: Reflections on Wendy Brown's Undoing the Demos Patchen Markell Theory & Event, Volume 20, Number 2, April 2017, pp. 520-527 (Article) Published by Johns Hopkins University Press For additional information about this article https://muse.jhu.edu/article/655784 Access provided by Hunter College Libraries (30 Jul 2018 16:38 GMT) Neoliberalism’s Uneven Revolution: Reflections on Wendy Brown’s Undoing the Demos Patchen Markell endy Brown’s Undoing the Demos1 tells a big, ambitious, and unfamiliar story about what neoliberalism is, and about Wwhat its ascent means for us. Unlike a lot of lesser books and articles on the subject, its sweep does not come at the cost of being vague, hasty, or gestural. It is, to the contrary, theoretically precise, deliberately paced, and carefully rooted in rich and detailed accounts of our present and our recent past. And, most of all, it is a book that is more than the sum of its individual arguments: to read it is to be drawn into a space and a perspective that will change how you look at the world. In that, I think it is a masterpiece of political theory. The questions and comments posed here about Undoing the Dem- os are meant to be internal to its space—that is, they are meant to be questions and comments of the kind that, on my reading anyway, the book means to provoke or invite. Before posing these questions, then, I need to say something about how I understand Brown’s rhetorical stance in Undoing the Demos, which, if I’m right, may also help avoid a possible misunderstanding of the book.
    [Show full text]
  • Lucerne Master Class 2016 with Prof
    Graduate School of Humanities and Social Sciences Lucerne Master Class 2016 With Prof. Dr. Axel Honneth Jack C. Weinstein Professor for the Humanities, Columbia University (New York) Professor of Social Philosophy, Goethe University (Frankfurt) Towards a Critical Theory of Markets 2–6 May 2016, University of Lucerne Course Location: Hotel Seeburg, Lucerne Contents: Welcome! 4 Organisation 5 Preparation 6 Axel Honneth & Towards a Critical Theory of Markets 7 Programme Overview 8 Detailed Programme 9 Monday 9 Tuesday 10 Wednesday 11 Thursday 12 Friday 12 Participants & Projects 13 Bader, Daniel 14 Dijkstra, Lizabeth 16 Heiland, Heiner 18 Knobbe, Sonja 20 Léger, Alexandre 22 Niazi, Nahyan 24 Overwijk, Jan 26 Peter, Lukas 28 Møller Stahl, Rune 30 Schmieden, Susanne 32 Teixeira, Pedro 34 Tunderman, Simon 36 Vogel, Tobias 38 Waitkus, Nora 40 Wienhues, Anna 42 3 Welcome! Dear Participants We are pleased to welcome you in Lucerne, Switzerland for the third Lucerne Master Class en- titled Towards a Critical Theory of Markets from 2–6 May 2016! Running annually from 2015–2019 under the general theme The Culture of Markets, the Graduate School of Humanities and Social Sciences (GSL) at the University of Lucerne will be offering one- week Master Classes, which will offer the opportunity to analyse the variety of virulent problems in the market through a range of scientific perspectives. We wish you all an inspiring and pleasant time at the University of Lucerne and we are looking forward to spending this week with you. Yours sincerely Prof. Dr. Martin Hartmann Professor of Philosophy, Chair for Practical Philosophy at the University of Lucerne.
    [Show full text]
  • Government 4000/6816 Cornell University Fall
    Government 4000/6816 Professor Patchen Markell Cornell University Office hours: Tuesdays, 2–4pm Fall 2021 or by appointment, White Hall 311 [email protected] SEMINAR: ARENDT Mondays, 11:20am–1:50pm, location TBA COURSE DESCRIPTION: This is a seminar on the political thought of Hannah Arendt, meant for advanced undergraduates and graduate students in Government and related fields in the humanities and humanistic social sciences. Prior familiarity with Arendt’s work is not necessary, but some prior work in political theory is required (e.g., Government 1615, for undergraduates). One source of Arendt’s enduring interest as a political theorist lies in the fact that she seemed to understand the meaning of “politics” very differently from many of her contemporaries and predecessors. But if politics is not essentially about the distinction between friends and enemies; or the possession of the legitimate means of violence in a territory; or who gets what, when, and how; or who does what to whom; or the rule of reason in the city and the soul—then what was politics, from Arendt’s perspective? Why did it matter? Was there such a thing as doing politics well or badly? What were the prospects for politics as a distinctive human practice in the post-World War II world? In this seminar we will pursue these and other questions via a slow, chapter-by-chapter reading and discussion of Arendt’s 1958 book The Human Condition, along with a number of other, shorter works of Arendt’s from from the 1940s through the 1970s. These readings will be supplemented by selections from the works of philosophers with whom Arendt was tacitly or explicitly engaged; selections from the writings of some of Arendt’s contemporaries, which will help us situate her work in the political and intellectual landscapes of the postwar world; and a few more recent readings that will give us different angles on some of the subjects Arendt addressed.
    [Show full text]
  • Curriculum Vitae Candace A. Vogler Department of Philosophy the University of Chicago 1115 East 58Th Street Chicago, IL 60637
    Curriculum Vitae Candace A. Vogler Department of Philosophy The University of Chicago 1115 East 58th Street Chicago, IL 60637 Academic Appointments David B. and Clara E. Stern Professor of Philosophy, University of Chicago Chair of Virtue Theory, Jubilee Centre for Character and Virtues & Fellow, Royal Institute of Philosophy, May 2018-May 2021 Fulbright Distinguished Visiting Professor, University of Notre Dame Australia, August- September 2017 Chair, Department of Philosophy, University of Chicago, 2011-2014 Professor, Department of Philosophy, University of Chicago, 2007-2010 Associate Professor, Department of Philosophy, University of Chicago, 2000-2007 Co-Director, Masters of Arts Program in the Humanities, University of Chicago, 2000-2007 Assistant Professor, Department of Philosophy, University of Chicago, 1994-2000 Lecturer, Department of Philosophy, University of Chicago, 1992-1994 Lecturer, Department of Philosophy, University of California, Los Angeles, 1992 Lecturer, Department of Philosophy, University of California, Davis, 1991 Instructor, Department of Philosophy, Chatham College, 1989 Teaching Fellow, Department of Philosophy, University of Pittsburgh, 1988-1990 Education University of Pittsburgh (1985-1992), Ph.D., Philosophy, 1994 Ph.D. certificate, Program for the Study of Culture, 1992 Mills College (1978-1981; 1984-1985), B.A. in Philosophy, Honors, 1985 Fellowships and Awards Fulbright Specialist World Learning Roster (2017-present) Distinguished Visiting Faculty, Jubilee Centre for Character and Virtues, University
    [Show full text]
  • Recognition and Responsibility
    religions Article Recognition and Responsibility Hille Haker Department of Theology, Loyola University Chicago, Chicago, IL 60660, USA; [email protected] Abstract: While the concept of responsibility is a cornerstone of Christian ethics, recognition theory still lacks a thorough theological–ethical analysis. This essay seeks to fill the gap and develop normative ethics of recognition and responsibility. The first part provides a systematic analysis of the conceptual elements of recognition, emphasizing the need to focus on misrecognition as a heuristic tool and ethical priority. While recognition coincides with responsivity and attentiveness in the encounter of self and other, responsibility adds to this the moral accountability for acts, practices, structures, and institutions, rendering recognition and responsibility interrelated but also distinct principles of morality. This normative analysis is then correlated to the hermeneutical, narrative ethics of Christian ethics. The founding narrative of biblical ethics, the Cain and Abel narrative in Gen 4, is interpreted as a dialectic of recognition and responsibility. Both exegesis and ethics profit from this interdisciplinary and correlative approach between philosophical and biblical ethics. Finally, the ethics of recognition and responsibility, which emerges from the Frankfurt School critical theory, is confronted with exemplary indigenous approaches focusing on mutual responsibility as the foundation of ecological ethics. Christian ethics of recognition and responsibility resonates with
    [Show full text]