DOCSLIB.ORG

Curiosity: Philosophy and the Politics of Difference

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Curiosity: Philosophy and the Politics of Difference DePaul University Via Sapientiae College of Liberal Arts & Social Sciences Theses and Dissertations College of Liberal Arts and Social Sciences 7-2015 Curiosity: philosophy and the politics of difference Perry Zurn DePaul University, PERRY.A.ZURN@GMAIL.COM Follow this and additional works at: https://via.library.depaul.edu/etd Recommended Citation Zurn, Perry, "Curiosity: philosophy and the politics of difference" (2015). College of Liberal Arts & Social Sciences Theses and Dissertations. 183. https://via.library.depaul.edu/etd/183 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the College of Liberal Arts and Social Sciences at Via Sapientiae. It has been accepted for inclusion in College of Liberal Arts & Social Sciences Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Via Sapientiae. For more information, please contact digitalservices@depaul.edu. CURIOSITY: PHILOSOPHY AND THE POLITICS OF DIFFERENCE A Thesis Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy June, 2015 BY Perry Zurn Department of Philosophy College of Liberal Arts and Social Sciences DePaul University Chicago, Illinois Copyright © 2015 by Perry Zurn All rights reserved ii To Holly Zurn for teaching me to read the world And to Sara Atlee for inspiring me to live in it iii Philosophy leaps ahead on tiny toeholds; hope and intuition lend wings to its feet. Calculating reason lumbers heavily behind, looking for better footholds, for reason too wants to reach that alluring goal which its divine comrade has long since reached. It is like seeing two mountain climbers standing before a wild mountain stream that is tossing boulders along its course: one of them light-footedly leaps over it, using the rocks to cross, even though behind and beneath him they hurtle into the depths. The other stands helpless; he must first build himself a fundament which will carry his heavy cautious steps. Occasionally this is not possible, and then there exists no one who can help him across. What then is it that brings philosophical thinking so quickly to its goal? Is it different from the thinking that calculates and measures, only by virtue of the greater rapidity with which it transcends all spaces? No, its feet are propelled by an alien, illogical power—the power of creative imagination. Lifted by it, it leaps from possibility to possibility, using each one as a temporary resting place. —Nietzsche, Philosophy in the Tragic Age of the Greeks iv CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS vi INTRODUCTION 1 I. Curiosity and Philosophy 4 II. A Short History of Curiosity 7 III. Nietzsche‟s Account 17 IV. Heidegger and Curiosity 22 V. Turning to Foucault and Derrida 28 CHAPTER ONE: FOUCAULT: HISTORIES OF CURIOSITY 32 I. Foucault‟s Histories of Curiosity 34 II. The Archeological Writings 36 III. The Genealogical Writings 46 IV. A Nascent Account of Curiosity 60 CHAPTER TWO: FOUCAULT: AN ETHICS OF CURIOSITY 65 I. Curiosity and the Moral Life 67 II. Curiosity and the Public Intellectual Life 76 III. Curiosity and the Writing Life 85 CHAPTER THREE: A CASE STUDY OF PUBLICITY 97 I. Foucault and the GIP 100 II. The GIP and Publicity 106 III. Foucault and Kierkegaard on Publicity 110 IV. Foucault on Leveling 119 CHAPTER FOUR: DERRIDA: DECONSTRUCTING CURIOSITY 131 I. “The Most Curious of Men” 133 II. Sovereign Curiosity 140 III. Animal Curiosity 148 IV. Limit Cases: God and the Herb of the Field 155 V. Philosophical Curiosity 163 CHAPTER FIVE: A CASE STUDY OF INQUIRY 169 I. Technologies of Theological-Political Sovereignty 170 II. The Death Penalty and Philosophy 174 III. The Guillotine 179 IV. The Question 182 V. The Abolition of Inquiry 196 CONCLUSION 201 BIBLIOGRAPHY 214 v ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This work springs from a series of debts, debts which are as impossible to calculate as they are to forget. I am grateful to my committee for their support in general and their comments on the project in particular. Thanks to Tina Chanter and Elizabeth Rottenberg for their graduate seminar, in fall 2008, where this project really began to take shape. It was here that I started to grapple with curiosity‟s ambiguous role in a politics of difference. Thanks to Tina for seeing me through the early stages and believing in what did not yet exist. Thanks to Michael Naas and Elizabeth Rottenberg for their invitation to join the Derrida Seminars Translation Project 2010- 2012, where I began to analyze a certain kind of curiosity as the deconstruction of philosophy. To David Wills and Geoffrey Bennington for encouragement in the project, and to Peggy Kamuf and Elissa Marder for important references along the way. And thanks to Kevin Thompson for the invitation to translate material from the Prisons Information Group. It was this archival work that pushed me to investigate the relationship between curiosity, language, and punishment. Thanks to the many conference audiences who offered important questions and clarifications in the process. To the anonymous readers at Radical Philosophy Review for their helpful comments on early drafts of Chapters Two and Three and to the special issue editors, Andrew Dilts and Natalie Cisneros, for seeing a shorter version of Chapter Three through to publication. To Jeremy Bell, Andrew Dilts, Dilek Huseyinzadegan, Anna Johnson, Sina Kramer, Jana McAuliffe, and Jeff Pardikes for their community of inquiry and care. A special thanks to Andrew for his friendship, his mentorship, and what has become a rich experience of collaboration. Thanks to DePaul‟s McNair Scholars Program: Lindsey Back, Luciano Berardi, Paulina Nava, Gina Nuñez, Lee Westrick, Ife Williams, and Shannon Williams for their interest in the project from the start and their understanding in its final hours. Working with them has given me a renewed, concrete appreciation for the importance of diversifying the methods and practitioners of curiosity. To my family: Danielle, Kristin, Luke, John, Robert, Grace, Abigail, Lydia, Khyber, and Sara for their strange and relentless questions over the years. To Dad, who sparred with me so early. To Kris, who wanders so well. And to Dani, my first and last companion in inquiry. Lastly, to Marie, for her patience and her faith. vi Introduction This work is concerned with curiosity in relation to philosophical method and the politics of difference.1 Philosophy and politics, however, are not the typical referents for the term curiosity. In the media today, curiosity usually appears rather in relation to science and pedagogy. Science, in this more colloquial context, appears to be the ultimate expression of a trained curiosity. From observation and hypothesis to experimentation and results, science is both driven by the need to know and directed by strategies for knowledge. Now, if science is the pinnacle of curiosity, pedagogy is its foundation. Through pedagogy, natural curiosity is identified, trained, developed, and matured. One might wonder, then, why take on curiosity under such unusual guises as philosophy and politics? Why not analyze it through a philosophy of science or education? Such a project is quite viable in its own right and could fruitfully be undertaken. Nevertheless, I propose that, within the contemporary scientific and pedagogical discourses, the questions of philosophical method and a politics of difference are surreptitiously raised. By addressing them head-on, perhaps we can assess what would otherwise have been missed. There is an insidious side to the figure of curiosity. It is not just some neutral drive or a positive impetus. It is a word bandied about to dismiss or valorize thoughts and persons, to critique or defend liminal thinking and being. As such, curiosity exists squarely at the heart of philosophy and politics. 1 I will refer, throughout, to a “politics of difference.” Although I am informed by Luce Irigaray‟s “ethics of difference,” as developed in An Ethics of Sexual Difference (1984; New York: Cornell University Press, 1993), I am relying in this work primarily on Iris Marion Young‟s Justice and the Politics of Difference (1990; Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2011). For Irigaray, ethics paradigmatically concerns individual deeds, it happens between you and me. Whereas politics, for Young, relates to social or group deeds; it happens between us. How one understands and enacts a politics of difference is certainly an ethical question, but I will emphasize, nevertheless, the collectivity necessarily involved in that action. 1 Since November 2011, curiosity has been making headlines, not as some abstract human impetus to explore but as NASA‟s new Mars Rover: “Curiosity.”2 This rover, equipped not only to collect but to test data on site, will, with any luck, answer the now age-old question of whether or not Mars ever sustained life. In one sense, naming the Mars Rover “Curiosity” is hardly surprising: the rover, much like its namesake, is an expression of the human mind, catapulting simultaneously into the past and the future, intent on knowledge. In another sense, however, the name is strange. “Curiosity” is an oddly lifelike machine, with six legs, one arm, a head-like antenna, and a brain in its belly. Outside of its own organic structure, it serves as the eyes and ears of many scientists. It is a monstrous mechanical object. It bends and breaks our ideas of intelligence and organism. It acts formulaically, without any emotion or instinct of its own, and yet it is adaptive and experimental. “Curiosity” both tackles and reflects the strange, the unknown, and the otherworldly. One might even think that our curious drive mimics its own object, embodies its object in the process of understanding it, whether as a tactic or as a price. But curiosity‟s appearance as the Mars Rover was not its only splash in 2011. In August, the Discovery Channel aired a new series called Curiosity, which then returned in 2012.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • What Does It Mean to Make-Up the Mind (Οὕτω Διανοεῖσθε)? Justin Murphy
    parrhesia 29 · 2018 · 163-189 what does it mean to make-up the mind (οὕτω διανοεῖσθε)? justin murphy Under what conditions can thought and speech participate meaningfully in sys- temic political transformations? In my view, two bodies of late twentieth-century thought stand out as the most advanced efforts to answer this question. Gilles De- leuze and Michel Foucault, in their own registers and of course with very differ- ent accents, both suggest substantial but complicated roles thinking and speaking might have to play in any viable future project of emancipatory politics. Given the idealistic associations and connotations of such terms as thinking and speaking, it is no surprise that both figures have been charged with similar crimes: individual- ism, aestheticism, or escapism, all of which are typically implied to render their bodies of work unhelpful for projects of organized, collective political change.1 In the present historical moment of the so-called age of information, we are now in a better position than ever to understand the ways in which mere thought and speech are unable to generate politically significant emancipatory dynamics. In modern global capitalism, it has never seemed more clear that what is called free- dom of speech and the public exchange of ideas is perfectly consistent with the perpetuity and even intensification of oppressive institutional dynamics. Yet, I wish to suggest that in this rightful disillusionment with mere thought and speech lies an opportunity for improving our understanding of the unique conditions under which certain types of thought and speech might be keys to unlocking new forms of emancipatory politics today, in the context of what Deleuze called “con- trol societies.”2 If it is true that Foucault and Deleuze are two of the most advanced thinkers of this question—and yet even they remain uncleared of charges relating to political triviality—then it would seem that the surest way to advance the question would be to begin at the edges of where they left off.
    [Show full text]
  • Beyond Skepticism Foundationalism and the New Fuzziness: the Role of Wide Reflective Equilibrium in Legal Theory Robert Justin Lipkin
    Cornell Law Review Volume 75 Article 2 Issue 4 May 1990 Beyond Skepticism Foundationalism and the New Fuzziness: The Role of Wide Reflective Equilibrium in Legal Theory Robert Justin Lipkin Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/clr Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Robert Justin Lipkin, Beyond Skepticism Foundationalism and the New Fuzziness: The Role of Wide Reflective Equilibrium in Legal Theory , 75 Cornell L. Rev. 810 (1990) Available at: http://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/clr/vol75/iss4/2 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at Scholarship@Cornell Law: A Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Cornell Law Review by an authorized administrator of Scholarship@Cornell Law: A Digital Repository. For more information, please contact jmp8@cornell.edu. BEYOND SKEPTICISM, FOUNDATIONALISM AND THE NEW FUZZINESS: THE ROLE OF WIDE REFLECTIVE EQUILIBRIUM IN LEGAL THEORY Robert Justin Liphint TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION .............................................. 812 I. FOUNDATIONALISM AND SKEPTICISM ..................... 816 A. The Problem of Skepticism ........................ 816 B. Skepticism and Nihilism ........................... 819 1. Theoretical and PracticalSkepticism ................ 820 2. Subjectivism and Relativism ....................... 821 3. Epistemic and Conceptual Skepticism ................ 821 4. Radical Skepticism ............................... 822 C. Modified Skepticism ............................... 824 II. NEW FOUNDATIONALISM
    [Show full text]
  • Critical Inquiry As Virtuous Truth-Telling: Implications of Phronesis and Parrhesia ______
    ______________________________________________________________________________ Critical Inquiry as Virtuous Truth-Telling: Implications of Phronesis and Parrhesia ______________________________________________________________________________ Austin Pickup, Aurora University Abstract This article examines critical inquiry and truth-telling from the perspective of two comple- mentary theoretical frameworks. First, Aristotelian phronesis, or practical wisdom, offers a framework for truth that is oriented toward ethical deliberation while recognizing the contingency of practical application. Second, Foucauldian parrhesia calls for an engaged sense of truth-telling that requires risk from the inquirer while grounding truth in the com- plexity of human discourse. Taken together, phronesis and parrhesia orient inquirers to- ward intentional truth-telling practices that resist simplistic renderings of criticality and overly technical understandings of research. This article argues that truly critical inquiry must spring from the perspectives of phronesis and parrhesia, providing research projects that aim at virtuous truth-telling over technical veracity with the hope of contributing to ethical discourse and social praxis. Keywords: phronesis, praxis, parrhesia, critical inquiry, truth-telling Introduction The theme of this special issue considers the nature of critical inquiry, specifically methodological work that remains committed to explicit goals of social justice and the good. One of the central concerns of this issue is that critical studies have lost much of their meaning due to a proliferation of the term critical in educational scholarship. As noted in the introduction to this issue, much contemporary work in education research that claims to be critical may be so in name only, offering but methodological techniques to engage in critical work; techniques that are incapable of inter- vening in both the epistemological and ontological formations of normative practices in education.
    [Show full text]
  • Kierkegaard on Selfhood and Our Need for Others
    Kierkegaard on Selfhood and Our Need for Others 1. Kierkegaard in a Secular Age Scholars have devoted much attention lately to Kierkegaard’s views on personal identity and, in particular, to his account of selfhood.1 Central to this account is the idea that a self is not something we automatically are. It is rather something we must become. Thus, selfhood is a goal to realize or a project to undertake.2 To put the point another way, while we may already be selves in some sense, we have to work to become real, true, or “authentic” selves.3 The idea that authentic selfhood is a project is not unique to Kierkegaard. It is common fare in modern philosophy. Yet Kierkegaard distances himself from popular ways of thinking about the matter. He denies the view inherited from Rousseau that we can discover our true selves by consulting our innermost feelings, beliefs, and desires. He also rejects the idea developed by the German Romantics that we can invent our true selves in a burst of artistic or poetic creativity. In fact, according to Kierkegaard, becom- ing an authentic self is not something we can do on our own. If we are to succeed at the project, we must look beyond ourselves for assistance. In particular, Kierkegaard thinks, we must rely on God. For God alone can provide us with the content of our real identi- ties.4 A longstanding concern about Kierkegaard arises at this point. His account of au- thentic selfhood, like his accounts of so many concepts, is religious.
    [Show full text]
  • Merily Salura Moral Epistemology and Totalitarianism: Reflections on Arendt, Bauman, Bernstein, and Rorty Bachelor’S Thesis
    TALLINN UNIVERSITY ESTONIAN INSTITUTE OF HUMANITIES Cultural Theory Merily Salura Moral epistemology and totalitarianism: reflections on Arendt, Bauman, Bernstein, and Rorty Bachelor’s thesis Supervisor: Siobhan Kattago Tallinn 2015 Table of Contents 1 RESÜMEE ..................................................................................................................... 4 2 INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................... 5 3 METHOD ..................................................................................................................... 12 3.1 Reflection on sources ......................................................................................... 13 4 TOTALITARIANISM ................................................................................................. 15 5 THE CONCEPT OF MORALITY ............................................................................... 19 6 THE BANALITY OF EVIL ........................................................................................ 25 6.1 The banality of evil in the light of Stanley Milgram‘s social experiments ........ 29 7 ETHICAL OBJECTIVISM .......................................................................................... 39 7.1 Ethical objectivism in the context of totalitarianism .......................................... 41 7.1.1 The pretension for a firm foundation and universality ....................................... 41 7.1.2 Ethical objectivism and standards of morality
    [Show full text]
  • Exploring Liquid Modernity, Material Feminisms, Care of the Self, and Parrhesia
    Journal of critical Thought and Praxis Iowa state university digital press & School of education ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Volume 6 Issue 1 Everyday Practices of Social Justice Article 2 Working Towards Everyday Social Justice Action: Exploring Liquid Modernity, Material Feminism, Care of the Self, and Parrhesia Lauren P. Hoffman Follow this and additional works at: http://lib.dr.iastate.edu/jctp/vol6/iss1/ This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Digital Repository @ Iowa State University. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of Critical Thought and Praxis by an authorized editor of Digital Repository @ Iowa State University Journal of Critical Thought and Praxis 2017, Vol. 6, No. 1, 1-17 Working Towards Everyday Social Justice Action: Exploring Liquid Modernity, Material Feminisms, Care of the Self, and Parrhesia Lauren P. Hoffman* Lewis University The purpose of this paper is to explore the difficulty many critically prepared educators and leaders experience when wanting to translate their social justice knowledge into everyday social justice practices. Even though these individuals are critically conscious and want to critically act, many become overwhelmed with the enormity of the neoliberal crisis, tend to fear actually acting against or speaking up in the face of injustice, and may become cynical in terms of even believing in the possibility of any type of educational and social transformation. To address this reticence, the postmodern and posthuman concepts of liquid modernity (Bauman, 2006, 2007) material feminisms (Barad, 2007,2008), care of the self and parrhesia (Foucault, 2001, 2005, 2011) were presented to educational leadership doctoral students as ideas to explicitly challenge their issues of fear and cynicism.
    [Show full text]
  • And Solidarity
    Contingency,rencYrlfooY, andsolidarity RICHARD RORTY U niaersityProfessor of Hamanities, Uniaersityof Virginia ry,,,*-_qCaUBRTDGE WP uNrvERsrrY PREss Published by the PressSyndicarc of dre University of Cambridge The Pitt Building Trumpington Street, Cambridge CB2 IRP 40 Vest 20th Suect, New York, NY 10011-4211,USA l0 Stamford Road, Oakleigh, Melbourne 3166, Australia @ Cambridgc University Press1989 First published 1989 Reprinted 1989 (thrice), 1990, l99l (cwice), 1992, 1993, 1994, r995 Printed in the United Sratesof America Library of Congess Catdoging-in-Publication Daa is available British Library Cataloging in Publication applied for ISBN0-521 -3538r -5 hardback ISBN0-52 I -1678l -6 paperback In memory of six liberals: my parentsand grandparents The agdlasrer lRabelais's word for those who do not laughJ, the non- thought of received ideas, and kitsch are one and the same, the three- headed enemy of the art born as the echo of God's laughter, the art that created the fascinating imaginative realm where no one owns the truth and everyone has the right to be understood. That imaginative realm of tolerance was born with modern Europe, it is the very image of Europe- of at least our dream of Europe, a dream many times betrayed but nonetheless strong enough to unite us all in the fraternity that stretches far beyond the little European continent. But we know that the wodd where the individual is respected (the imaginative world of the novel, and the real one of Europe) is fragile and perishable. if European culture seems under threat today, if the threat from within and without hangs over what is most precious about it - its respect for the individual, for his original thought, and for his right to an inviolable private life - then, I believe, that precious essenceof the European spirit is being held safe as in a treasure chest inside the history of the novel, the wisdom of the novel.
    [Show full text]
  • Books Added to Benner Library from Estate of Dr. William Foote
    Books added to Benner Library from estate of Dr. William Foote # CALL NUMBER TITLE Scribes and scholars : a guide to the transmission of Greek and Latin literature / by L.D. Reynolds and N.G. 1 001.2 R335s, 1991 Wilson. 2 001.2 Se15e Emerson on the scholar / Merton M. Sealts, Jr. 3 001.3 R921f Future without a past : the humanities in a technological society / John Paul Russo. 4 001.30711 G163a Academic instincts / Marjorie Garber. Book of the book : some works & projections about the book & writing / edited by Jerome Rothenberg and 5 002 B644r Steven Clay. 6 002 OL5s Smithsonian book of books / Michael Olmert. 7 002 T361g Great books and book collectors / Alan G. Thomas. 8 002.075 B29g Gentle madness : bibliophiles, bibliomanes, and the eternal passion for books / Nicholas A. Basbanes. 9 002.09 B29p Patience & fortitude : a roving chronicle of book people, book places, and book culture / Nicholas A. Basbanes. Books of the brave : being an account of books and of men in the Spanish Conquest and settlement of the 10 002.098 L552b sixteenth-century New World / Irving A. Leonard ; with a new introduction by Rolena Adorno. 11 020.973 R824f Foundations of library and information science / Richard E. Rubin. 12 021.009 J631h, 1976 History of libraries in the Western World / by Elmer D. Johnson and Michael H. Harris. 13 025.2832 B175d Double fold : libraries and the assault on paper / Nicholson Baker. London booksellers and American customers : transatlantic literary community and the Charleston Library 14 027.2 R196L Society, 1748-1811 / James Raven.
    [Show full text]
  • Parrhesia 31 · 2019 Parrhesia 31 · 2019 · 1-16
    parrhesia 31 · 2019 parrhesia 31 · 2019 · 1-16 gaston bachelard and contemporary philosophy massimiliano simons, jonas rutgeerts, anneleen masschelein and paul cortois1 There are philosophers whose name sounds familiar, but who very few people know in more than a vague sense. And there are philosophers whose footprints are all over the recent history of philosophy, but who themselves have retreated somewhat in the background. Gaston Bachelard (1884-1962) is a bit of both. With- out doubt, he was one of the most prominent French philosophers in the first half of the 20th century, who wrote over twenty books, covering domains as diverse as philosophy of science, poetry, art and metaphysics. His ideas profoundly influ- enced a wide array of authors including Georges Canguilhem, Gilbert Simondon, Roland Barthes, Michel Foucault, Bruno Latour and Pierre Bourdieu. Up until the 1980s, Bachelard’s work was widely read by philosophers, scientists, literary theo- rists, artists, and even wider audiences and in his public appearances he incar- nated one of the most iconic and fascinating icons of a philosopher. And yet, surprisingly, in recent years the interest in Bachelard’s theoretical oeuvre seems to have somewhat waned. Apart from some recent attempts to revive his thinking, the philosopher’s oeuvre is rarely discussed outside specialist circles, often only available for those able to read French.2 In contemporary Anglo-Saxon philosophy the legacy of Bachelard seems to consist mainly in his widely known book Poetics of Space. While some of Bachelard’s contemporaries, like Georges Canguilhem or Gilbert Simondon (see Parrhesia, issue 7), who were profoundly influenced by Bachelard, have been rediscovered, the same has not happened for Bachelard’s philosophical oeuvre.
    [Show full text]
  • Kierkegaard on Socrates' Daimonion
    Kierkegaard on Socrates’ daimonion Citation for published version (APA): Sneller, R. (2020). Kierkegaard on Socrates’ daimonion. International Journal of Philosophy and Theology, 81(1), 87-100. https://doi.org/10.1080/21692327.2019.1649602 DOI: 10.1080/21692327.2019.1649602 Document status and date: Published: 01/01/2020 Document Version: Publisher’s PDF, also known as Version of Record (includes final page, issue and volume numbers) Please check the document version of this publication: • A submitted manuscript is the version of the article upon submission and before peer-review. There can be important differences between the submitted version and the official published version of record. People interested in the research are advised to contact the author for the final version of the publication, or visit the DOI to the publisher's website. • The final author version and the galley proof are versions of the publication after peer review. • The final published version features the final layout of the paper including the volume, issue and page numbers. Link to publication General rights Copyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights. • Users may download and print one copy of any publication from the public portal for the purpose of private study or research. • You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain • You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the public portal.
    [Show full text]
  • Parrhesia E Injusticias Epistémicas
    Parrhesia and epistemic injustices Parrhesia e injusticias epistémicas Gonzalo Lucas Gallego Universidad de Murcia romath11@gmail.com DOI: https://doi.org/10.15366/bp2017.17.015 Bajo Palabra. II Época. Nº17. 2017. Pgs: 309-328 Recibido: 15/01/2016 Aprobado: 26/10/2017 Resumen Abstract El presente trabajo acomete el aná- The present paper attempts to analyse lisis de las complejas relaciones entre the complex relationship between truth verdad y democracia a partir de la no- and democracy from the notion of pa- ción de parrhesia, tal y como esta fue rrhesia, as Foucault treated it during his rescatada por Michel Foucault durante last works. The Foucauldian approach sus últimos trabajos. La propuesta fou- establishes a stressing linkage on one caultiana predica una vinculación cons- another: there can be no democracy wi- titutiva, no exenta de tensiones, entre thout appealing to certain idea of truth, ambas: no puede haber democracia sin but the emergence of such truth invol- referencia a una cierta idea de verdad, ves the existence of a democratic space. pero la emergencia de tal verdad presu- Such space is constructed through the pone la existencia de un espacio demo- critic of every attempt to monopolize crático. La construcción de ese espacio the capacity of saying the truth. In this se realiza sobre la crítica a todo intento sense, the concept of epistemic injusti- de monopolizar la capacidad de decir la ce helps us to understand how political verdad. En este sentido, el concepto de and epistemic dimensions are interwo- injusticia epistémica nos ayuda a enten- ven in the democratic process.
    [Show full text]
  • Richard Rorty on Education
    Providence College DigitalCommons@Providence Philosophy Faculty Publications Philosophy 1-1-1995 The New Fuzziness: Richard Rorty on Education Phillip E. Devine Providence College, pdevine@providence.edu Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.providence.edu/philosophy_fac Part of the Philosophy Commons Devine, Phillip E., "The New Fuzziness: Richard Rorty on Education" (1995). Philosophy Faculty Publications. 1. https://digitalcommons.providence.edu/philosophy_fac/1 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Philosophy at DigitalCommons@Providence. It has been accepted for inclusion in Philosophy Faculty Publications by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@Providence. For more information, please contact dps@providence.edu. The New Fuzziness: Richard Rorty and Education Philip E. Devine One key task of philosophy is to criticize other philosophy, not only -- even if most importantly -- in the interests of truth but because, whether philosophers will it so or not, philosophical ideas are influential in social, moral, and political life. Alasdair MacIntyre TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Abbreviations i Author's Note iii Introduction iv I. An Overview 1 II. Pragmatism in Education 17 III. Contingency, Irony, and Solidarity 30 Contingency 30 Pragmatism 31 Relativism 34 Redescription 36 Irrationalism 38 Irony 42 Solidarity 45 Conclusion 54 IV. A Philosophical Evaluation 62 V. Educational Implications 79 An Analytic Approach 79 A Historical Approach 80 A Problems Approach 89 Conclusion 93 VI. Why Rorty? 99 Conclusion 109 References 113 List of Abbreviations (By Richard Rorty unless otherwise indicated.) D "The Dangers of Over-Philosophication: Reply to Acrilla and Nicholson," Educational Theory, 40 (Winter 1990), 41-44. CIS Contingency, Irony, and Solidarity.
    [Show full text]