Abstract

Rancière’s reception among political theorists connects to what some have called an “aesthetic turn” in the study of politics. One feature of this turn is a critique of the emphasis on reason found in Rawls- and Habermas-inspired political thought. At least on the standard readings of them, Rawls and Habermas conceive of politics as a process of adjudicating competing interests and validity claims. Political theory then becomes an effort to determine the principles that should guide this adjudication and how they might be institutionalized. For theorists of the aesthetic turn, however, such an approach to politics overlooks fundamental issues, specifically about what is sensed and how...