Giorgio Agamben and Post-Foundational Political Ontology
Kuupäev
2015-07-02
Autorid
Ajakirja pealkiri
Ajakirja ISSN
Köite pealkiri
Kirjastaja
Abstrakt
Käesolev väitekiri, mis koosneb kolmest artiklist ja sissejuhatusest, uurib Giorgio Agambeni poliitilist filosoofiat, mis on lähiaastatel mõjutanud erinevaid teadusdistsipliine. Paljude kommentaatorite arvates loovad Agambeni arheoloogilised uurimused ja mõtisklused liialt ekstreemse ja pessimistliku pildi kaasajast. Niisuguste provokatiivsete paradigmadega nagu „kontsentratsioonilaager“, „erakorraline seisukord“ ja „Muselmann“ on raske, kui mitte võimatu, käsitleda teravaid sotsiaalpoliitilisi teemasid, mis on ühtlasi nii mitmekesised kui ka keerulised. Suundumus, millele keskendub peamiselt minu doktoritöö, lähtub Oliver Marcharti ja Ernesto Laclau post-fundatsionalistlikust kriitikast, mis näeb Agambeni homo sacer`i projektis pessimistlikku reaktsiooni metafüüsiliste ja poliitiliste põhikategooriate ammendumisele.
Uurides Marcharti ja Laclau seisukohti, näitan, kuidas post-fundatsionalistliku poliitilise ontoloogia kolm põhiprobleemi saavad uue mõtte Agambeni potentsiaalsusekäsituse valguses.
Esiteks, kontrastina Marcharti väitele, et Agambeni intellektualistlikud mõtisklused hävitavad poliitilisuse (ontoloogilisuse) ja poliitika (ontilisuse) diferentsi, ma visandan agambenliku seisukoha „poliitilisest diferentsist kui poliitilisest diferentsist“. Teiseks, vastandina Marcharti post-fundatsionalistlikule mõtlemisele, mis muudab poliitilised põhjamis- ehk asutamisteod lõputuks tegevuseks, ma väidan, et Agamben tahab seisata sellised poliitilised asutamisteod nagu „poliitiline artikulatsioon“ ja suveräänne otsustus. Seesugune strateegia ei lange anti-fundatsionalismi paradoksi lõksu, kuna see viib fundatsionalismi messiaanlikult täide. Kolmandaks, vastukaaluna Laclau veendumusele, ma väidan, et Agamben ei elimineeri sotsiaalset antagonismi, vaid pigem seab poliitilise mõtlemise vastamisi ülesandega mõtelda antagonismi teisiti kui piirsuhet. Ma näitan, et Agambeni mõiste „elu-vorm“ annab võimaluse mõtelda sotsiaalset antagonismi teistmoodi.
Minu kolm artiklit („Political Differentiability”, “Giorgio Agamben’s ‘Messianic Fulfilment’ of Foundationalism in Politics” ja “Towards a Rethinking of Laclau and Mouffe’s Conception of ‘Social Antagonisms’”) arendavad ülalmainitud ideesid detailselt.
The present dissertation that consists of the three articles and the introduction examines Giorgio Agamben’s political philosophy that has gained some currency across disciplines over the recent years. Yet, for many commentators, Agamben’s archaeological reconstructions and reflections paint far too extreme and pessimistic picture of the human condition. With provocative paradigms such as “the concentration camp”, “the state of exception”, and “the Muselmann”, it is hard, if not impossible, to shed light on contemporary socio-political issues that are both diverse and complex. A line of thought, with which I am mainly occupied in the dissertation, departs from Oliver Marchart and Ernesto Laclau’s post-foundational critique of Agamben that associates Agamben’s homo sacer project with the pessimistic reaction to the exhaustion of metaphysical and political categories. By engaging with Marchart and Laclau’s point of view, I aim at showing how the three major problems of post-foundational political ontology can be rethought on the basis of Agamben’s conception of potentiality. First, in contrast to Marchart’s claim that Agamben’s intellectualism collapses the political difference between the political (the ontological) and politics (the ontic), I construct Agamben’s account of „the political difference as political difference“. Secondly, in opposition to Laclau and Marchart’s post-foundational political thought that makes political grounding into a never-ending activity, I argue that Agamben seeks to render the political acts of grounding (e.g., “political articulation” and sovereign decision) “inoperative”. This strategy, insofar it does not simply negate, but rather fulfils foundationalism messianically, does not fall prey to the paradox of anti-foundationalism. Thirdly, contrary to Laclau’s position, I argue that Agamben does not eliminate social antagonism, but rather faces political thinking with the task of reconsidering antagonism otherwise than the limit relation. Agamben’s concept of “form-of-life”, as I demonstrate, offers an opportunity to rethink the concept of social antagonism from the ground up. My three articles—“Political Differentiability”, “Giorgio Agamben’s ‘Messianic Fulfilment’ of Foundationalism in Politics” and “Towards a Rethinking of Laclau and Mouffe’s Conception of ‘Social Antagonisms’”—develop the above-mentioned ideas in detail.
The present dissertation that consists of the three articles and the introduction examines Giorgio Agamben’s political philosophy that has gained some currency across disciplines over the recent years. Yet, for many commentators, Agamben’s archaeological reconstructions and reflections paint far too extreme and pessimistic picture of the human condition. With provocative paradigms such as “the concentration camp”, “the state of exception”, and “the Muselmann”, it is hard, if not impossible, to shed light on contemporary socio-political issues that are both diverse and complex. A line of thought, with which I am mainly occupied in the dissertation, departs from Oliver Marchart and Ernesto Laclau’s post-foundational critique of Agamben that associates Agamben’s homo sacer project with the pessimistic reaction to the exhaustion of metaphysical and political categories. By engaging with Marchart and Laclau’s point of view, I aim at showing how the three major problems of post-foundational political ontology can be rethought on the basis of Agamben’s conception of potentiality. First, in contrast to Marchart’s claim that Agamben’s intellectualism collapses the political difference between the political (the ontological) and politics (the ontic), I construct Agamben’s account of „the political difference as political difference“. Secondly, in opposition to Laclau and Marchart’s post-foundational political thought that makes political grounding into a never-ending activity, I argue that Agamben seeks to render the political acts of grounding (e.g., “political articulation” and sovereign decision) “inoperative”. This strategy, insofar it does not simply negate, but rather fulfils foundationalism messianically, does not fall prey to the paradox of anti-foundationalism. Thirdly, contrary to Laclau’s position, I argue that Agamben does not eliminate social antagonism, but rather faces political thinking with the task of reconsidering antagonism otherwise than the limit relation. Agamben’s concept of “form-of-life”, as I demonstrate, offers an opportunity to rethink the concept of social antagonism from the ground up. My three articles—“Political Differentiability”, “Giorgio Agamben’s ‘Messianic Fulfilment’ of Foundationalism in Politics” and “Towards a Rethinking of Laclau and Mouffe’s Conception of ‘Social Antagonisms’”—develop the above-mentioned ideas in detail.
Kirjeldus
Väitekirja elektrooniline versioon ei sisalda publikatsioone.
Märksõnad
Itaalia, filosoofid, poliitiline filosoofia, metafüüsika, ontoloogia, Italy, philosophers, political philosophy, metaphysics, ontology