Six political philosophies in search of a virus: critical perspectives on the coronavirus pandemic

The Coronavirus (Covid-19) poses interesting questions for social and political thought. These include the nature and limits of the ethical responsibility of the state, personal liberty and collective interests, human dignity, and state surveillance. As many countries throughout the world declared states of emergency, some of the major questions in political philosophy become suddenly highly relevant. Foucault’s writings on biopolitical securitization and Agamben’s notion of the state of exception take on a new reality, as do the classical arguments of utilitarianism and libertarianism. In this paper, I discuss six main philosophical responses to the pandemic, including provocative interventions made by Agamben, Badieu, and Zizek, Latour on the governance of life and death as well as the Kantian perspective of Habermas on human dignity

Europe and the emergence of modernity. The entanglement of two reference cultures

This article offers a theory of the notion ‘reference culture’ by taking as major examples modernity and Europe. Both constitute reference cultures and while different are closely related. A certain entanglement took place between the emergence of modernity and the formation of European culture whereby the latter came to be one of the main carriers of modernity. However, they need to be separated in that Europe, while being the first major expression of modernity, is not the only embodiment of modernity. Modernity can be termed a first-order reference culture and Europe a second-order one. While there have been many second-order reference cultures, the European one was an influential and powerful one, but it was also a temporary one. This article sets out the main features that define the specificity of Europe. Against accounts that emphasize a master narrative or an underlying cultural unity to Europe, it is argued that crucial to the making of Europe was the formation of modes of communication that enabled common practices to develop across a range of different cultures. In this way, it is argued, Europe consolidated as a consequence less of endogenous factors than exogenous ones. Important, too, was the mobile nature of European culture which facilitated translation into other cultures and which was also receptive to modernity. The twentieth century has witnessed the emergence of other varieties of modernity and the global decline of the European mode

Book review: Habermas and religion

"Habermas and religion." Craig Calhoun, Eduardo Mendieta and Jonathan VanAntwerpen (eds.). Polity Press. October 2013. --- Habermas and Religion aims to present a series of original and sustained engagements with Habermas’s writing on religion in the public sphere. Contributors to the volume respond both to Habermas’s ambitious and well-developed philosophical project and to his most recent work on religion. The book closes with an extended response from Habermas – itself a major statement from one of today’s most important thinkers. The volume is essential reading for philosophers and sociologists of religion and generally for anyone concerned with religion and politics, writes Gerard Delanty

The historical regions of Europe: civilizational backgrounds and multiple routes to modernity

A systematic typology or comparative analysis of European historical regions does not exist and there is relatively little literature on the topic. The argument in this paper is that a six-fold classification is needed to capture the diversity of Europe’s historical regions and that these should be seen in terms of different routes to modernity and have broad civilizational backgrounds in common. The forms of modernity that constitute Europe as a world historical region correspond to North Western Europe, Mediterranean Europe, Central Europe, East Central Europe, South Eastern Europe, North Eastern Europe

No todo se pierde en la traducción. Variedades mundiales de cosmopolitismo

Un importante desafío de los muchos que hoy se plantean al pensamiento cosmopolita es el problema de la traducción conceptual y cultural, puesto que el cosmopolitismo puede ser altamente relevante para ciertos desarrollos del pensamiento indio y chino, incluso cuando no se utiliza el mismo término en las fuentes o interpretaciones. Se abordan tres problemas, a saber: las posiciones universalistas contra las contextualistas; el eurocentrismo y el problema de las traducciones conceptuales y culturales entre el pensamiento occidental y el no occidental. El argumento central es que el pensamiento cosmopolita debe expandirse más allá de su genealogía occidental para incluir otras tradiciones. Sin embargo, la solución no depende simplemente de identificar aquellas tradiciones culturales alternativas a las occidentales que puedan contener distintos tipos de valores cosmopolitas, sino de encontrar, en estas distintas tradiciones culturales, recursos para una cosmopolítica. De esta forma, el cosmopolitismo crítico busca plantear una alternativa tanto a las posiciones contextualistas fuertes como a las posiciones universalistas fuertes

The future of capitalism: trends, scenarios and prospects for the future

The article provides a framework for thinking about how the question of the future of capitalism might be addressed. One of the problems resides in the very definition of capitalism and of what its defining features consist of and whether we should be talking about ‘capitalist society’ or the ‘capitalist economy’ or some kind of post-capitalist condition. Following Polanyi, Castoriadis and Habermas, it is argued that capitalism and democracy together constitute the defining dynamics of modernity and that the resulting tensions will provide momentum for the main circuits of potential change. Five scenarios for looking at the future are discussed. These will form the main substance of the article: varieties of capitalism, systemic crises of capitalism, catastrophic collapse, low growth capitalism and post-capitalism. In conclusion, it is argued that there are various possibilities that can be understood in terms of transitions, breakdown or transformation, but a likely future trend will be less the end of capitalism than the harnessing of ‘super-capitalism’ and that there are limits to the accumulation of capital

Entangled memories: how to study Europe’s cultural heritage

A fruitful direction for research on the European cultural heritage is to adopt a transnational approach. Rather than see cultural heritage as predominantly expressed in national contexts, it could be seen as primarily transnational and as plural. Such a view would also suggest a conception of national histories as themselves products of transnational encounters. In this perspective, the European dimension is not then necessarily something over and above nations, but part of their heritage. Moreover, as fundamentally transnational, the European heritage is not exclusively confined to Europe. Cultural heritage is not something that is fixed or based on an essence; it is produced and reinterpreted by social actors in different but overlapping contexts. This is also an interpretative approach that draws attention to the entangled nature of memories and especially the cultural logic by which new conceptions and narratives of heritage emerge from the encounter and entanglement of different memories. Such an approach offers new opportunities for comparative research on the European heritage as an entangled mosaic of histories and memories. This approach thus rejects not only particularistic but also universalistic ones such as alternative Eurocentric accounts

A transnational world?: The implications of transnationalism for comparative historical sociology

The essay seeks to explore the implications of transnational and global history for comparative historical sociology, especially in light of notions of entangled history, postcolonial critiques, theories of the ‘Global South,’ and new interpretations of empire. It offers an assessment of the implications of the transnational turn for comparative history, arguing that, despite some of the claims made, this should largely be seen as a shift rather than a turn and as a corrective rather than a fundamentally new paradigm. Following from a discussion of some of the issues that have arisen from the transnational turn, in particular with respect to the work of a new generation of global historians, such as Bayly, Osterhammel and Pomeranz, the essay then considers the different contribution of comparative historical sociology, including civilizational analysis, as in the work of Eisenstadt and Arnason. The argument is advanced that while comparative historical sociology is today in crisis as a result of being overtaken by developments within transnational and global history, it offers much promise. The two fields cannot be entirely separated, but comparative historical sociology has a strong tradition of comparative analysis that is different from historiographical analysis and which remains undeveloped. The specificity of the sociological dimension is urgently in need of renewal. It is argued that this largely resides in an interpretative approach to social inquiry. However, this has not yet been fully exploited in relation to transnationalism