The modern political order rejects any notion of ‘divine violence’. But in refusing the possibility of the category, states obscure their own forms of sacred violence. Carl Schmitt describes the structure of a political theology that can illumine this dynamic. But his account of divine violence would put historical figures in the role of sovereign, and so open the way to theocratic tyranny. Walter Benjamin proposes a more transcendent sovereign power. He describes a divine violence that rejects both the theocracy (...) of Schmitt and the neo-Kantian ‘realism’ critiqued by Gillian Rose. From Benjamin we can develop a notion of divine violence that interrupts the mythologization of the state and makes possible a rightly secular politics. (shrink)

I am proposing that when engaging with the narrative of another, there needs to be a conscious consideration, an essential articulation of enquiry; a pause.

Gillian Rose was a philosopher, social theorist, memoirist, and Jewish convert to Christianity who died an untimely death in 1995. She offers a novel account of faith, which grows out of her Hegelian philosophical background inflected by her reading of Kierkegaard and her rediscovered Jewish heritage. For Rose, faith is a mode of social practice. Rose's conception of faith is here reconstructed by translating her obscure jurisprudential idiom into the language of social practices and norms. The conception of secular faith (...) developed by Rose is shown to have implications for contemporary discussions of ethics and politics. The contemporary relevance of Rose's work is made clear through comparison with recent work by Robert Brandom, Robert Adams, and Patrick Deneen. (shrink)

Recognition theory attempts to conceptualize interpersonal relationships and their normative political implications. British social philosopher Gillian Rose developed her own version of recognition rooted in the work of Georg Hegel. This article applies Rose's theory of recognition to care, arguing that its emphasis on lack of identity, the dynamic process of recognition and the existential risks involved accurately describes the relationship between nurse and patient. Rose's version is compared to both contemporary notions of the interpersonal in healthcare literature, other forms (...) of recognition theory and Emmanuel Levinas's vision of intersubjective relationships, a traditional philosophical basis for nursing care. In each case, I will argue that Rosean recognition is a fuller, more complex and ultimately more satisfying view of the relationships involved. (shrink)