Two thousand five hundred years ago, in 507–506 B.C.E., the institutions of Athen were rocked by the reforms of Cleisthenes. Although the word did not yet exist, here was the foundation of democracy. First published in French in 1964, Cleisthenes the Athenian has become the classic study of the philosophical, political, and aesthetic background and significance of these reforms. The book has influenced a generation of scholars in anthropology, sociology, urban planning, political science, philosophy, and classical studies. This English translation (...) contains the complete text of the original essay and is supplemented by a discussion among Vidal-Naquet, Leveque, and the philosopher Cornelius Castoriadis on the invention of democracy, as well as a new authors' introduction. (shrink)

This chapter explores themes like freedom of expression and what makes for a democratic society by examining characters and situations collected from a variety of South Park episodes. It discusses some of the important democratic concepts and arguments presented by thinkers like Karl Popper and Thomas Jefferson. Of particular interest are the roles of free expression and unfettered intellectual inquiry—even when they're offensive—in a democratic society. Finally, the author speaks that Popper and others understand this sort of freedom to be (...) absolutely essential to a healthy democracy. (shrink)

The increase in cases of political corruption, the loss of politicians' credibility, the development of social and political forms of pathology, and the role of the State have been at the center of political debates. In one way or another, these problems raise the question of the legitimacy of the established powers. The result is that legitimacy, a key notion of political thought in general, has today become a burning issue. Coicaud examines all these issues and proffers insightful answers to (...) questions such as the connections between morality and politics, how rulers acquire or lose the right to govern, and how one can become the advocate of a theory of political justice that, while establishing limits, respects and even ensures the promotion of plurality within societies. (shrink)

This posthumous book represents the first publication of one of the seminars of Cornelius Castoriadis, a renowned and influential figure in twentieth-century thought. A close reading of Plato's _Statesman_, it is an exemplary instance of Castoriadis's pragmatic, pertinent, and discriminating approach to thinking and reading a great work: "I mean really reading it, by respecting it without respecting it, by going into the recesses and details without having decided in advance that everything it contains is coherent, homogeneous, makes sense, and (...) is true." Castoriadis brings out what he calls _The Statesman_'s "quirky structure," with its three digressions, its eight incidental points, and its two definitions, neither of which is deemed good. He does not hesitate to differ with the text, to show that what is, in appearance, secondary is really essential, and that the denunciation of the Sophists accommodates itself quite well to the use of sophistical procedures. Castoriadis shows how _The Statesman_ takes us into the heart of what is distinctive in the late Plato: blending, acceptance of the mixed, of the intermediate. These transcriptions of Cornelius's afford the reader an opportunity to discover his trenchant, convincing, energetic, provocative, and often droll voice. Here is a hitherto unknown Castoriadis, who reflects as he speaks, collects himself, corrects himself, and doesn't hesitate to revisit key points. In short, this is Castoriadis's thinking in action. (shrink)

The problems with polygenic scores (PGSs) have been understated. The fact that they are ancestry-specific means that biases related to sociodemographic factors would be impossible to avoid. Additionally, the requirement to obtain DNA would have profound impacts on study design and required resources, as well as likely introducing recruitment bias. PGSs are unhelpful for social science research.

Writing involves risks—the risk that one will be misunderstood, the risk of being persecuted, the risks of being made a champion for causes in which one does not believe, this risk of inadvertently supporting a reader’s prejudices, to name a few. In trying to give expression to what is true, the writer must “clear a passage within the agitated world of passions,” an undertaking that always to some extent fails: writers are never the master of their own speech. In _Writing: (...) The Political Test, _France’s leading political philosopher, Claude Lefort, illuminates the process by which writers negotiate difficult path to free themselves from the ideological and contextual traps that would doom their attempts to articulate a new vision. Lefort examines writers whose works provide special insights into this problem of risk, both literary artists and political philosophers. Among them are Salman Rushdie, Sade, Tocqueville,m Machiavelli, Leo Strauss, Orwell, Kant, Robespierre, Guizot, and Pierre Clastres. In Tocqueville, for example, Lefort finds that the author’s improvisatory and open-ended expression represents the character of the democratic experience. Orwell’s work on totalitarianism shows up the totalitarian subject’s complicity in this political regime. And Rushdie is remarkable for his solid attack on relativism. With the character and fate of the political forms of modernity, democracy, and totalitarianism a central theme, Lefort concludes with some reflections on the collapse of the Soviet Union. This intriguing and accessible exploration of literature’s political aspects and political philosophy’s literary ones will be welcomed by those who have been stymied by current efforts to bridge these two fields. Taken together, the essays in this volume also stand as an intellectual autobiography of Lefort, making it an excellent introduction to his work for less experience students of political theory or philosophy. (shrink)