Modern American literature began with a statement of enthusiasm from Emerson's writing in Nature. 'Enthusiasm', in Emerson, is a knowing word. Sometimes its use is as description, invariably approving, of a historic form of religious experience. Socrates' meaning of enthusiasm, and the image of the enthusiast it throws up, is crucial to this book. The book is a portrait of the writer as an enthusiast, where the portrait, as will become clear, carries more than a hint of polemic. It is about the transmission of literature, showing various writers taking responsibility for that transmission, whether within in their writing or in their cultural activism. Henry David Thoreau's Walden is an enthusiastic book. It is where enthusiasm works both in Immanuel Kant's sense of the unbridled self, and in William Penn's sense of the 'nearer' testament, and in Thoreau's own sense of supernatural serenity. Establishing Ezra Pound's enthusiasm is a fraught and complicated business. Marianne Moore composed poems patiently, sometimes over several years. She is a poet of things, as isolated things - jewels, curios, familiar and exotic animals, common and rare species of plant - are often the ostensible subjects of her poems. Homage to Frank O'Hara is a necessary book, because the sum of his aesthetic was to be found not just in his writing, but also in his actions to which only friends and contemporaries could testify. An enthusiastic reading of James Schuyler brings to the fore pleasure, the sheer pleasure that can come of combining, or mouthing, or transcribing.
Since the Enlightenment, liberal democrat governments in Europe and North America have been compelled to secure the legitimacy of their authority by constructing rational states whose rationality is based on modern forms of law. The first serious challenge to liberal democratic practices of legal legitimacy comes in Karl Marx's early writings on Rousseau and Hegel. Marx discovers the limits of formal legal equality that does not address substantive relations of inequality in the workplace and in many other spheres of social life. This book investigates the authoritarianism and breakdown of those state socialist governments which claim to put Marx's ideas on democracy and equality into practice. It offers an immanent critique of liberalism, and discusses liberal hegemony, attacking on liberalism from supposedly post-liberal political positions. Liberalism protects all individuals by guaranteeing a universally enforceable form of negative liberty which they can exercise in accordance with their own individual will. Immanuel Kant's critical philosophy both affirms and limits human agency through the media of rationality and legality. The conditions of liberal reason lay the groundwork for the structure of individual experience inside the liberal machine. The book also shows how a materialist reformulation of idealist philosophy provides the broad outlines of a theory of critical idealism that bears directly upon the organisation of the labour process and the first condition of legitimate law concerning humanity and external nature. Mimetic forms of materialism suggest that the possibilities for non-oppressive syntheses and realities are bound up with a libertarian union of intellect.
Rainer Forst's Toleration in Conflict (published in English 2013) is
the most important historical and philosophical analysis of toleration of the
past several decades. Reconstructing the entire history of the concept, it
provides a forceful account of the tensions and dilemmas that pervade the
discourse of toleration. In his lead essay for this volume, Forst revisits his
work on toleration and situates it in relation to both the concept of political
liberty and his wider project of a critical theory of justification.
Interlocutors Teresa M. Bejan, Chandran Kukathas, John Horton, Daniel Weinstock,
Melissa S. Williams, Patchen Markell and David Owen then critically examine
Forst's reconstruction of toleration, his account of political liberty and
the form of critical theory that he articulates in his work on such political
concepts. The volume concludes with Forst’s reply to his critics.
also offers an important perspective for any future critical theory
of law (4).1
1. Kant’s “pure law”
Christoph Menke’s claim that violence is implied in the very “concept
of law” (p. 4, original emphasis) is derived from the definition of law
provided by ImmanuelKant’s chapter on the “Doctrine of Right” in
his Metaphysics of Morals.2 “Right and authorization to use coercion,”
Kant succinctly states, “mean one and the same thing.”3 This connection between law and coercion is conceptual and not merely historical,
because it is generated by means of an a priori
the Irish university and as it compares with the university education in the humanities subjects envisaged by
writers and thinkers such as ImmanuelKant, John Henry Newman, Pádraig
Pearse, Jacques Derrida and others.
Even though the focus of the book will be the National University because
of the unique restrictions and conflicts at the heart of its humanities programmes, any such study is for many commentators by corollary a study of
the influence of Trinity College on university life in Ireland. Following the
second Presidents’ and Bishops’ Liaison Committee in
of the key principles of an emancipatory anti-racism, one that holds out the possibility of transcending racisms and consigning them to the dustbin of history.
Conventional social science versus Marx
ImmanuelKant, the Enlightenment philosopher, has had a profound influence on the development of social science as an approach to understanding the
social world. Kant aimed to reconcile empiricist and rationalist approaches in
philosophy. According to the empiricist view of the world, all knowledge comes
through experience. We know the things that we know
, and because since the 1850s American writers, poets
especially, have been working on the house that Emerson and Thoreau built, a
structure designed to house or at least to accommodate Kant, hence Emerson’s
explanation of the otherwise unhelpfully numinous term by which he and his
contemporaries made themselves known:
It is well known to most of my audience that the idealism of the present
day acquired the name of transcendental from the use of the term by
ImmanuelKant of Konigsburg, who replied to the skeptical philosophy of
Locke which insisted that there was
2 Cited in Jeremy Waldron, ‘Kant’s Theory of the State’, in ImmanuelKant, Toward
Perpetual Peace (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2006), 191.
3 Cited in Paul Rabinow (ed.), The Foucault Reader (London: Penguin Books,
4 Michel Foucault, The Archaeology of Knowledge (London: Routledge, 2011), 199.
5 Rabinow (ed.), The Foucault Reader, 63.
6 Cited in Rabinow (ed.), The Foucault Reader, 22.
7 Hubert L. Dreyfus and Paul Rabinow, Michel Foucault. Beyond Structuralism and
Hermeneutics (New York: Harvester, Wheatsheaf, 1982
in so far as they have need of you. They will swear, with shameless falsehood, that your interests are as dear to them as their own. But do not believe them; block your ears to their siren calls. (p. 162)
This odd juxtaposition of aloofness and hard-headed practicality was hardly more interestingly expressed than in the international-relations theories of ImmanuelKant. On the face of it, his description of interstate relations is pessimistic. Kant writes about the readiness with which states go to war and how this ‘is exhibited without disguise in the
This is the first book-length study of the humanities from Newman to Bologna in the Irish context. It focuses on unique characteristics of university policy in the National University that constrained humanities education. Ireland was a deeply religious country throughout the twentieth century but the colleges of its National University never established a theology or religion department. The official first language of Ireland is Irish but virtually all teaching in the Arts and Humanities is in English. The book examines the influence of such anomalies on humanities education and on Irish society in general. Has the humanities ethos of the Irish University departed radically from the educational ideals of John Henry Newman, its most illustrious ‘founder’? The book re-examines Newman’s vision for the university as well as responses to the 1908 Universities Act. It investigates how leading Irish educationalists and cultural theorists such as Padraig, Pearse, Denis Donoghue, J. J. Lee, Declan Kiberd and Richard Kearney nurtured an Irish humanities perspective in response to more established humanities traditions associated with F. R. Leavis, Edward Said, and Martha Nussbaum. The book employs a comparative approach in examining recent humanities movements such as Irish Studies and postcolonial studies. Humanities debates from other national contexts such as France, the US, and Asia are examined in light of influential work on the university by Samuel Weber, Immanuel Kant, Pierre Bourdieu and Jacques Derrida. This book will appeal to the general public and to students and scholars of Irish education, history and cultural theory.