David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
This paper re-examines debates surrounding Irigaray's 'essentialism', arguing that these debates have generated a widespread assumption that realist essentialism is philosophically untenable and that Irigaray must therefore be read as a non-realist, merely 'political', essentialist. I suggest that this assumption is unhelpful, as Irigaray's work shows increasing commitment to a realist form of essentialism. Moreover, I argue that political essentialism is internally unstable because it aims to revalue femininity and the body as symbolised, thereby reinforcing the traditional conceptual hierarchy of the symbolic over the corporeal. I reinterpret Irigaray's own work as moving away from her earlier political essentialist project of revaluing symbolic femininity, towards the realism of her recent thought, which urges us to revalue and transfigure real, sexually differentiated, bodies by pursuing their cultural expression and enhancement. I aim to show that Irigaray's recent work is philosophically coherent and sophisticated, and that it opens up the possibility of a radical and transformative kind of realist essentialism
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library||
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Alison Stone (2003). The Sex of Nature: A Reinterpretation of Irigaray's Metaphysics and Political Thought. Hypatia 18 (3):60-84.
Ping Xu (1995). Irigaray's Mimicry and the Problem of Essentialism. Hypatia 10 (4):76 - 89.
Diana J. Fuss (1989). "Essentially Speaking": Luce Irigaray's Language of Essence. Hypatia 3 (3):62 - 80.
Joyce N. Davidson & Mick Smith (1999). Wittgenstein and Irigaray: Gender and Philosophy in a Language (Game) of Difference. Hypatia 14 (2):72-96.
Alison Stone (2006). Luce Irigaray and the Philosophy of Sexual Difference. Cambridge University Press.
Joyce Nira Davidson & Mick Smith (1999). Wittgenstein and Irigaray: Gender and Philosophy in a Language (Game) of Difference. Hypatia 14 (2):72 - 96.
Lynda Haas (1993). Review: Of Waters and Women: The Philosophy of Luce Irigaray. [REVIEW] Hypatia 8 (4):150 - 159.
Kate Ince (1996). Questions to Luce Irigaray. Hypatia 11 (2):122 - 140.
Elizabeth Hirsh, Gary A. Olson & Gaëton Brulotte (1995). "Je-Luce Irigaray": A Meeting with Luce Irigaray. Hypatia 10 (2):93 - 114.
Margaret Whitford (1991). Irigaray's Body Symbolic. Hypatia 6 (3):97 - 110.
Dorothea Olkowski (2000). The End of Phenomenology: Bergson's Interval in Irigaray. Hypatia 15 (3):73-91.
Alison Stone (2003). Irigaray and Hölderlin on the Relation Between Nature and Culture. Continental Philosophy Review 36 (4):415-432.
Annemie Halsema (2006). Reconsidering the Notion of the Body in Anti-Essentialism, with the Help of Luce Irigaray and Judith Butler. In Deborah Orr (ed.), Belief, Bodies, and Being: Feminist Reflections on Embodiment. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. 151--61.
Mary Beth Mader (2003). All Too Familiar: Luce Irigaray's Recent Thought on Sexuation and Generation. [REVIEW] Continental Philosophy Review 36 (4):367-390.
Added to index2011-01-29
Total downloads10 ( #148,771 of 1,103,045 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #297,567 of 1,103,045 )
How can I increase my downloads?