From the theory of ‘deliberative democracy’ to the politics of the ‘third way’, the present Zeitgeist is characterized by attempts to deny what Chantal Mouffe contends is the inherently conflictual nature of democratic politics. Far from being signs of progress, such ideas constitute a serious threat to democratic institutions. Taking issue with John Rawls and Jürgen Habermas on one side, and the political tenets of Blair, Clinton and Schröder on the other, Mouffe brings to the fore the paradoxical nature (...) of modern liberal democracy in which the category of the ‘adversary’ plays a central role. She draws on the work of Wittgenstein, Derrida, and the provocative theses of Carl Schmitt, to propose a new understanding of democracy which acknowledges the ineradicability of antagonism in its workings. (shrink)

Since September 11, we frequently hear that the struggle is between good and evil and that politics is at an end. Should we welcome or fear a 'Third Way' beyond left and right? In this timely and thought provoking book, Chantal Mouffe argues that third way thinking ignores fundamental, conflictual aspects of human nature and that far from expanding democracy, globalization is undermining the combative and radical heart of democratic life. Going back first to Aristotle, she identifies the historical (...) origins of the political. She also reflects on the Enlightenment and the social contract, arguing that in spite of its good intentions, it fatally suppressed the radical core of political life. She uses many contemporary examples, including the Iraq war, racism and the rise of the far right, to argue that far from ending dangerous extremism, the political void created by the search for consensus inflames it. (shrink)

The themes of citizenship and community are today at the center of a fierce debate as both left and right try to mobilize them for their cause. For the left such notions are crucial in all the current attempts to redefine political struggle through extending and deepening democracy. But, argue the contributors to this volume, these concepts need to be made compatible with the pluralism that marks modern democracy. Rather than reject the liberal tradition, they argue, the aim should be (...) to radicalize it. These essays set out to examine what types of “citizen” and “community” might be required by such a radical and plural democracy. From a range of disciplines and a fruitful diversity of theoretical perspectives, the contributors help us to address the following challenge: how to defend the greatest possible pluralism without destroying the very framework of the democratic political community. Despite their differences, a vision emerges from these essays which is sharply at odds both with the universalistic and rationalistic conception to be found in the work of Habermas, and with postmodern celebrations of absolute heterogeneity. For this book is an exploration of politics—of a politics where power, conflict and antagonism will always play a central role. (shrink)

Chantal Mouffe is one of the most influential political theorists at work today. Her work has influenced political parties across Europe and continues to inform the direction of left politics. In this work, Mouffe argues that liberal democracy misunderstands the problems of ethnic, religious and nationalist conflicts because of its inadequate conception of politics.

One of the main reasons that liberal democratic societies are not ill-prepared to confront the present challenge presented by disaffection with democratic institutions, is that the type of political theory currently in vogue is dominated by an individualistic, universalistic, and rationalistic framework. This erases the dimension of the political and impedes envisaging in an adequate manner the nature of a pluralistic democratic public sphere. This paper examines the most recent paradigm of liberal democracy: 'deliberative democracy', in order to bring to (...) the fore its shortcomings. Then, the authos puts forward some element for the elaboration of an alternative model that she proposes to call 'agonistic pluralism'. (shrink)

Since September 11th, we frequently hear that political differences should be put aside: the real struggle is between good and evil. What does this mean for political and social life? Is there a 'Third Way' beyond left and right, and if so, should we fear or welcome it? This thought-provoking book by Chantal Mouffe, a globally recognized political author, presents a timely account of the current state of democracy, affording readers the most relevant and up-to-date information. Arguing that liberal (...) 'third way thinking' ignores fundamental, conflicting aspects of human nature, Mouffe states that, far from expanding democracy, globalization is undermining the combative and radical heart of democratic life. Going back first to Aristotle, she identifies the historical origins of the political and reflects on the Enlightenment, and the social contract, arguing that in spite of its good intentions, it levelled the radical core of political life. Contemporary examples, including the Iraq war, racism and the rise of the far right, are used to illustrate and support her theory that far from combating extremism, the quest for consensus politics undermines the ability to challenge it. These case studies are also highly effective points of reference for student revision. _On the Political _is a stimulating argument about the future of politics and addresses the most fundamental aspects of democracy that will aid further study. (shrink)

Revisiting the generally accepted notion of psycho-physical parallelism in Spinoza, Chantal Jaquet offers a new analysis of the relation between body and mind. Looking at a range of Spinoza's texts, and using an original methodology, she analyses their unity in action through affects, actions and passions.

Social entrepreneurship is perceived as a legitimate and innovative solution to social problems. Yet, when one looks at the literature one finds that the social problems that the SE movement seeks to address and how these problems are identified and defined are not studied. This lack of attention to the defining of social problems in SE has implications for the domain for problems do not exist unless they are recognized and defined, and those that define problems have influence on how (...) these will eventually be addressed. Our paper presents an analysis of framing activities in SE done by the actors involved in the development and promotion of the SE movement. Our analysis reveals that these actors are concerned with creating an ecosystem to support social entrepreneurs. Critical analysis of discourses of these actors reveals a powerful mobilization discourse, one that supports social entrepreneurs as the agents of change. We also find that as the SE movement emerged at the beginning of a cycle of protest against capitalist systems, their framing of SE as system changing of these very systems therefore finds strong resonance with a wide variety of actors. (shrink)

We show that all QE rings of prime power characteristic are constructed in a straightforward way out of three components: a filtered Boolean power of a finite field, a nilpotent Jacobson radical, and the ring Z p n or the Witt ring W 2 (F 4 ) (which is the characteristic four analogue of the Galois field with four elements).

To this day, Polynesian people continue to be reduced to the myth of the Good Savage. Beyond fables of innocence, protection and salvation, it is essential to reintegrate them within a truly human history, which accepts men and women in their bravery as well as in their pettiness, in their treasons as in their truthfulness, in their violence as in their generosity, in their hates as in their compassions. This would call for the deconstruction of 200 years of domineering, imperialism (...) and occupation. This would also put into question most of the current approaches, which assume that civilisation has to be Western, that Progress has to be material, and that the future has to be globalized. (shrink)

The aim of this paper is to provide an addendum to a paper by Rose with the same title which has appeared in an earlier issue of this Journal [2]. Our new result is: Theorem. A ring of characteristic zero which admits elimination of quantifiers in the language {0, 1, +, ·} is an algebraically closed field.

Chromosome ends have been implicated in the meiotic processes of the nematode Caenorhabditis elegans. Cytological observations have shown that chromosome ends attach to the nuclear membrane and adopt kinetochore functions. In this organism, centromeric activity is highly regulated, switching from multiple spindle attachments all along the chromosome during mitotic division to a single attachment during meiosis. C. elegans chromosomes are functionally monocentric during meiosis. Earlier genetic studies demonstrated that the terminal regions of the chromosomes are not equivalent in their meiotic (...) potentials. There are asymmetries in the abilities of the ends to recombine when duplicated or deleted. In addition, mutations in single genes have been identified that mimic the meiotic effects of a terminal truncation of the X chromosome. The recent cloning and characterization of the C. elegans telomeres has provided a starting point for the study of chromosomal elements mediating the meiotic process. (shrink)

The development of the new means of communication and the overwhelming presence of the media in all realms of life represent a challenge for democratic politics. In this presentation I want to argue that such a challenge can only be grasped and met by discarding the rationalist perspective dominant in liberal democratic political thought. Indeed, such a perspective impedes us from acknowledging the nature of the political struggle and the centrality of symbols in the construction of political identities.As the recent (...) growth of right-wing populist movements testifies, new political identities are currently being created and there is no doubt that the media are playing an important role in their diffusion. It would be a serious mistake however to present the media as the main culprit, and to see such movements as a consequence of `media politics'. The success of those movements would not be possible without a political rhetoric that managed to mobilize a wide range of signifiers. Had it not been able to articulate those signifiers into a chain of equivalence against the existing order, right-wing populism could not have made such important inroads in several European countries.From a theoretical point of view, what this reveals is the utter irrelevance of the rationalist approach to politics and the importance of the so-called `post-modern approach'. It shows that, despite what authors like Habermas pretend, the critique of Enlightenment rationalism does not constitute a threat to the modern democratic project. On the contrary, it is only by taking account of such a critique that it is possible to defend and deepen democratic institutions. If there is anything that endangers democracy nowadays, it is precisely the rationalist approach, because it is blind to the nature of the political and denies the central role that passions play in the field of politics. Only by drawing out all the implications of the critique of essentialism will it be possible to understand the process of construction of collective political identities and their discursive mode of articulation. (shrink)

I agree with the critique of rationalism proposed by Spinosa, Flores, and Dreyfus in ?Disclosing New Worlds?. Today the defence of democracy requires us to understand that allegiance to democratic institutions can only rest on identification with the practices, the language?games, and the discourses which are constitutive of the democratic ?form of life?, and that it is not a question of providing them with a rational justification. My comments are developed in two directions. First, as a development of their thesis (...) concerning the centrality of practices, I suggest that in order to grasp the present crisis of democratic forms of individuality we can learn a lot from Nietzsche's analysis of ?nihilism?. Second, I point to a dimension which I consider to be missing in the perspective put forward in the article. It fails to take account of the fact that the constitution of a ?we? always requires the determination of a ?them?. This, in my view, has important consequences for the relation between solidarity and politics. I conclude by arguing for the need to introduce an agonistic element in the view of solidarity, and for the crucial role of the category of the adversary in a pluralist democracy whose aim is to transform antagonism into agonism. (shrink)

Deconstruction and pragmatism constitute two of the major intellectual influences on the contemporary theoretical scene; influences personified in the work of Jacques Derrida and Richard Rorty. Both Rortian pragmatism, which draws the consequences of post-war developments in Anglo-American philosophy, and Derridian deconstruction, which extends and troubles the phonomenological and Heideggerian influence on the Continental tradition, have hitherto generally been viewed as mutually exclusive philosophical language games. The purpose of this volume is to bring deconstruction and pragmatism into critical confrontation with (...) one another through staging a debate between Derrida and Rorty, itself based on discussions that took place at the _College International de Philosophie_ in Paris in 1993. The ground for this debate is layed out in introductory papers by Simon Critchley and Ernesto Laclau, and the remainder of the volume records Derrida's and Rorty's responses to each other's work. Chantal Mouffe gives an overview of the stakes of this debate in a helpful preface. (shrink)

Deconstruction and pragmatism constitute two of the major intellectual influences on the contemporary theoretical scene; influences personified in the work of Jacques Derrida and Richard Rorty. Both Rortian pragmatism, which draws the consequences of post-war developments in Anglo-American philosophy, and Derridian deconstruction, which extends and troubles the phonomenological and Heideggerian influence on the Continental tradition, have hitherto generally been viewed as mutually exclusive philosophical language games. The purpose of this volume is to bring deconstruction and pragmatism into critical confrontation with (...) one another through staging a debate between Derrida and Rorty, itself based on discussions that took place at the _College International de Philosophie_ in Paris in 1993. The ground for this debate is layed out in introductory papers by Simon Critchley and Ernesto Laclau, and the remainder of the volume records Derrida's and Rorty's responses to each other's work. Chantal Mouffe gives an overview of the stakes of this debate in a helpful preface. (shrink)

Political conflict in our society is inevitable, and the results are often far from negative. How then should we deal with the intractable differences arising from complex modern culture? Developing her groundbreaking political philosophy of agnostics--the search for a radical and plural democracy--Chantal Mouffe examines international relations, strategies for radical politics, the future of Europe and the politics of artistic practices. She shows that in many circumstances where no alternatives seem possible, agonistics offers a new road map for change. (...) Engaging with cosmopolitanism, post-operaism, and theories of multiple modernities she argues in favor of a multipolar world with a real cultural and political pluralism. -- Publisher's website. (shrink)

Interroger le futur n'est pas une préoccupation nouvelle pour la philosophie. En effet, un certain nombre de philosophies qui sont parfois des sagesses, se sont questionnées sur cette dimension de la temporalité, en lui accordant une fonction existentielle fondamentale, autant pour la reconnaître comme anticipation et prudence ou alors pour lui donner une place juste et limitée : vivre au présent en cessant de se projeter à l'excès dans la dimension de l'à venir. Jouir du présent épargne de l...

La lecture de Fourier que nous voudrions privilégier trouve sa légitimité dans un questionnement contemporain sur l'économie, sa nature et sa place. Nous voudrions montrer que Fourier a l'audace de remettre en question les présupposés de l'économie de son siècle. Il pressent, dès les linéaments du développement du capitalisme industriel et marchand, les aberrations et excès de celui-ci : embryon d'une économie en démesure, menacée par des dérèglements et crises récurrentes. Nous avons pris l'...

La lecture de Fourier que nous voudrions privilégier trouve sa légitimité dans un questionnement contemporain sur l'économie, sa nature et sa place. Nous voudrions montrer que Fourier a l'audace de remettre en question les présupposés de l'économie de son siècle. Il pressent, dès les linéaments du développement du capitalisme industriel et marchand, les aberrations et excès de celui-ci : embryon d'une économie en démesure, menacée par des dérèglements et crises récurrentes. Nous avons pris l'...

Peu de philosophes sont issus des classes sociales défavorisées. Proudhon et Michel Onfray sont donc une exception. Cette situation les rapproche d’autant plus qu’ils sont tous deux fiers de cette origine et qu’ils estiment que ce parcours exceptionnel leur donne des devoirs envers ce peuple dont ils sont issus. Ainsi, devenus des intellectuels célèbres, ils conservent une grande proximité avec leur milieu d’origine, tout en se gardant de toute démagogie. Leur préoccupation principale est donc la mise en pratique de la (...) « démopédie », néologisme créé par Proudhon : il s’agit de donner la parole au peuple, c’est-à-dire l’outil intellectuel nécessaire pour exprimer sa pensée et ses besoins. Le rôle d’un philosophe plébéien consiste donc à aider le peuple à réfléchir sur le fonctionnement de la société et de la démocratie, afin qu’il cesse d’être dominé par l’élite politique et économique. Dans ce but, le philosophe plébéien propose des pistes pour instaurer une véritable démocratie grâce au mutualisme, et au fédéralisme appliqué aussi bien dans la vie économique que dans la vie politique. (shrink)

Comment adapter l’éthique journalistique aux réseaux sociaux ? Comment respecter son devoir de réserve sur les réseaux sociaux ? Faut-il respecter ce devoir de réserve même sur les réseaux sociaux ? Quelle transparence les journalistes doivent afficher sur les réseaux sociaux ? Cet article suggère des pistes de réflexion.

Riassunto Il tragico epilogo delle vicende graccane non lasciò indifferente la classe dirigente romana. La violenza e il ricorso legittimo ad essa furono oggetto di un’articolata riflessione storiografica presso le élites. La violenza diventò parametro interpretativo della storia politica dell’ultimo secolo della res publica. La rilevanza del problema influenzò profondamente la successiva riflessione storiografica, suscitando interesse anche nella storiografia moderna.

Nous sommes des êtres de chair, mais cette évidence s'obscurcit dès qu'il est question de déterminer l'étendue des aptitudes du corps et la nature de ses rapports avec l'esprit. Que peut au juste le corps? Telle est l'interrogation qui sous-tend depuis longtemps la réflexion philosophique et qui rend nécessaire aujourd'hui encore l'élaboration d'un " Connais-toi toi-même " corporel. Il importe alors d'examiner le corps à l'œuvre et d'explorer les diverses facettes de la corporéité pour en montrer la prodigieuse puissance. A (...) cet effet, il convient d'abord de cerner l'essence et la sphère d'extension de ce concept en épousant le mouvement qui, de l'inerte au vivant, des corps bruts au corps humain, préside à la constitution des multiples formes corporelles. Il s'agit ensuite de mesurer la puissance du corps à l'aune de ses capacités pratiques : puissance technique du corps en travail et au travail, puissance artistique et éthique du corps promoteur de valeurs, puissance sexuelle enfin qui nous enseigne de manière problématique aussi bien la différence entre nous et nous-mêmes - tant nous ne sommes pas ce que nous croyons être - que la différence entre le masculin et le féminin. Cet ouvrage est tout autant une méditation et une synthèse philosophiques qu'un hymne à la joie du corps. (shrink)

This article argues that John Rawls' liberal philosophising is an inadequate means of facing today's varied social and political challenges, both domestic and international, because it is incapable of grasping the antagonistic dimension which is constitutive of the political. Focusing first on Rawls' conception of politics in a well-ordered liberal society, and thereafter on his arguments pertaining to the field of international politics, it is shown how Rawls forecloses the recognition of the properly political moment by postulating that the discrimination (...) between what is legitimate and what is not legitimate is dictated by morality and rationality. With exclusions presented as rationally justified and with the antagonistic dimension of politics whisked away, liberalism appears as the truly moral and rational solution to the problem of how to organise human coexistence, and its universalisation becomes the aim of all those who are moved by moral and rational considerations. Against this conception, it is suggested that a future, more peaceful world would be less a cosmopolitan and more a pluralist one. (shrink)

While Cavell is well known for his reinterpretation of the later Wittgenstein, he has never really engaged himself with post-Investigations writings like On Certainty. This collection may, however, seem to undermine the profoundly anti-dogmatic reading of Wittgenstein that Cavell has developed. In addition to apparently arguing against what Cavell calls ‘the truth of skepticism’ – a phrase contested by other Wittgensteinians – On Certainty may seem to justify the rejection of whoever dares to question one’s basic presuppositions. According to On (...) Certainty, or so it seems, the only right response to someone with different certainties is a reproach like ‘Fool!’ or ‘Heretic!’. This article aims to show that On Certainty need not be taken to prove Cavell wrong. It explains that Wittgenstein, in line with the first two parts of The Claim of Reason, does not reject scepticism out of hand but rather questions the sceptic’s self-understanding. Using arguments from Part Three of The Claim, the article moreover argues that a confrontation with divergence calls for self-examination rather than self-righteousness. Precisely because Wittgenstein acknowledges ‘the groundlessness of our believing’ or, in Cavellian terms, ‘the truth of skepticism’, he is not the authoritarian thinker that some have taken him to be. (shrink)

This paper is part of a larger project defending of the foundations of microeconomics against recent criticisms by philosophers. Here, we undermine one source of these criticisms, arising from philosophers' disappointment with the performance of microeconomic tools, in particular game theory, when these are applied to normative decision theory. Hollis and Sugden have recently articulated such disappointment in a sophisticated way, and have argued on the basis of it that the economic conception of rationality is inadequate. We argue, however, that (...) their claim rests upon a misunderstanding of the concept of a game as it is used in microeconomics. (shrink)

Le système spinoziste comprend une infinité d'expressions de la Nature et offre aux modes finis que nous sommes la possibilité d'appréhender la puissance d'agir sous un angle physique, mental, ou encore psychophysique, selon qu'elle est ...