Suchergebnisse

Cover -- Half Title -- Title -- Copyright -- Dedication -- Epigraph -- Contents -- Acknowledgements -- Introduction -- Truth and world -- Truth and wisdom -- Socratic truth -- Truth and time -- 1 The True World -- The two worlds -- Whence worldlessness? -- The Christian world -- Spinoza's world -- 2 Cynic Nihilism -- Phusis -- Foucault's Cynics -- Apolis -- Negation -- 3 Paul's World -- A genealogy of cosmos -- Paul against empire -- Anti-cosmos -- Badiou's anti-cosmos -- 4 Paul: Nihilist or Overman? -- The reactive Paul -- The active Paul -- Paul the Overman -- The messianic vocation -- 5 Nietzsche's World -- Nietzsche's anti-cosmos -- The true world is a lie -- 'The world is perfect'4 -- Heidegger's Nietzsche -- 6 Heidegger's World -- Being-in-the-world -- Freedom and finitude -- The Nothing -- Nihilism -- 7 Parrhesia -- Parrhesia in the polis -- Philia -- Socrates's last words -- Philaletheia -- Conclusion -- References -- Index

"The question of nihilism is always a question of truth. It is a crisis of truth that causes the experience of the nothingness of existence. What elevated truth to this existential position? The answer is: philosophy. The philosophical will to truth opens the door to nihilism, since it both makes identifying truth the utmost aim and yet continually calls it into question. Baker develops the central insight that the crises of truth and of existence, or 'loss of world', that occur within nihilistic thought are inseparable, in a wide-ranging study from antiquity to the present, from ancient Cynics, St Paul, Nietzsche, Heidegger, Foucault, Agamben, and Badiou. Baker contends that since nihilism is always a question of the relation to the world occasioned by the philosophical will to truth, an answer to nihilism must be able to propose a new understanding of truth."--Bloomsbury Publishing

Includes bibliographical references and index

Addressing key issues including sovereignty, political community, democracy and international intervention, this book outlines a theory of cosmopolitan politics based on hospitality and makes an important contribution to the debates about cosmopolitanism and ethics in IR.

This book introduces radically alternative models of civil society that have been developed outside the liberal democratic frame of reference, models which suggest that civil society does offer new and non-statist democratic possibilities. Drawing on a wide range of civil society theory-practice from Eastern Europe and Latin America (including the Zapatistas in Mexico), and from visions of global civil society too, this book is uniquely positioned to consider the questions posed by these alternative voices for democratic theory and practice. * Are there alternatives to the liberal.

Underlying Giorgio Agamben's and Alain Badiou's disagreement over the apostle Paul we find common cause: following Paul's deactivation of law, both Agamben and Badiou see the fixed identities necessary to the naturalised nomos of State politics as transfigured by a politics of grace. This transfiguration is differently rendered as either the emergence of a universal subject (Badiou) or the opening up of existing subjectivities (Agamben), but both the messianic vocation in Agamben and the universal subject in Badiou allow subjective possibility to that which is not in the present objectified order. Developing this theme of a basic emancipatory affinity, two moments of the political which exist in a difficult but necessary tension are identified: revolution and dissent. While revolution signals subjective possibility itself by determining that the truth of the event is for all, dissidence keeps that possibility alive by pointing to the human subject's fundamental indeterminacy.

This article explores the account of international hospitality found in the natural law tradition from Vitoria to Kant. Rather than limit itself to intellectual history, the focus here is on a more enduring theme: the double-bind of hospitality which the natural lawyers encountered in seeking to find a place for the welcome of the foreigner in the 'law of nations'. Although these thinkers agreed on a natural right of communication, this proved destabilising, even destructive, of the property claims by which hosts establish their domain as properly theirs in the first place. All struggled with this double-bind, though this took different forms, from the concern that the law of hospitality might thereby justify colonial appropriation to fears for how it could threaten sovereignty. Two thinkers arguably find a way out of the double-bind of right of communication-right of property in hospitality, but sacrifice the law of hospitality in the process: Pufendorf, subordinating communication to property, turns hospitality into charity and thereby effectively denies it status as a law of nature; Kant, putting communication first, makes hospitality a matter of right, not philanthropy, but also sees it as instrumental to the development of a global civil condition, where it would be redundant. Adapted from the source document.

AbstractThis article explores the account of international hospitality found in the natural law tradition from Vitoria to Kant. Rather than limit itself to intellectual history, the focus here is on a more enduring theme: the double-bind of hospitality which the natural lawyers encountered in seeking to find a place for the welcome of the foreigner in the 'law of nations'. Although these thinkers agreed on a natural right of communication, this proved destabilising, even destructive, of the property claims by which hosts establish their domain as properly theirs in the first place. All struggled with this double-bind, though this took different forms, from the concern that the law of hospitality might thereby justify colonial appropriation to fears for how it could threaten sovereignty. Two thinkers arguably find a way out of the double-bind of right of communication-right of property in hospitality, but sacrifice the law of hospitality in the process: Pufendorf, subordinating communication to property, turns hospitality into charity and thereby effectively denies it status as a law of nature; Kant, putting communication first, makes hospitality a matter of right, not philanthropy, but also sees it as instrumental to the development of a global civil condition, where it would be redundant.