Search

In this paper, Eric Santner's theory of political flesh is appreciated in its relation to philosophy of religion and Christian theology. In the first part of the paper, Santner's speculative concept is brought into conversation with the debate on embodiment, incarnation, and a hermeneutics of the flesh. Santner's conception of the flesh is shown to follow a logic of excarnation, or rather disincorporation, and thus to be at odds with contemporary harmonistic theories of embodiment that attempt to think body and spirit together without rupture. In contrast, the relevance of Santner's theory lies precisely in its antagonistic reading of the dynamics that constitute human embodied being – a dimension overlooked by most recent theories of embodiment. The second part of the article develops a reading of Protestantism as a "religion of the flesh" in line with Santner's argument. In doing so, it is shown that the Protestant narrative of self-modernization and progress (Hegel's "religion of freedom") can be subverted by the conception of the flesh brought into play by Santner, revealing a much more ambivalent history of Protestantism. In a re-reading of the theologies of Karl Barth, Friedrich Schleiermacher, and John Calvin, it is shown that the Protestant understanding of the church can be made transparent to a figure of the undead that is virulent in it, namely the undead flesh of Jesus Christ. In the end, the question is raised whether this figure of an "undead" Christ might not be interpreted as a paradoxological intervention in the sense of Eric Santner. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Scrutinising Santner's comments on his own method in his recent book Untying Things Together, the paper argues that at the heart of Santner's theoretical endeavour lies something that might be called "the flesh of all words." To elaborate this thesis, I begin, following a corresponding hint by Santner himself, with a description of Freud's peculiar "way of working with concepts" in his The Interpretation of Dreams. From there I move on to the analysis of an author who has been one of Santner's main points of reference at least since his Psychotheology of Everyday Life: Franz Rosenzweig. The paper outlines Rosenzweig's self-interpretation in his essay "'The New Thinking'" and compares the specific methodology explained and developed in this text with the main work of Ferdinand Ebner, whose closeness to his own work Rosenzweig himself emphasised. Finally, against the background of these theoretical conceptions, I will borrow one of Santner's own neologisms and use it to describe his work as the "encystance" on/of this flesh of all words. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper tries to provide some clues and red threads through the magisterial work of Eric Santner. The first part takes the point of departure in his book on Schreber (My Own Private Germany) and tries to lay down a basic narrative that subtends most of Santner's work and can be encapsulated by "the secret history of modernity." This narrative is briefly spelled out through the relationship of Schreber the father (the "surplus father" as the continuation of the enlightenment), Doctor Flechsig (the seminal representative of the modern university discourse), and Schreber the son, the embodiment of the symptom of the progress of modernity. The second part of the paper scrutinizes three interrelated concepts proposed by Santner, too muchness, the surplus of immanence, and manatheism, which provide conceptual tools to address the break of modernity. The three concepts are brought into relation with the historical placement of psychoanalysis in modernity, the dialectic of "what remains" and the emergence of the new, and finally with the nature of the exception pertaining to the notion of the surplus. The last part, "the punning of reason," examines Santner's frequent use of puns ("puncepts") as a conceptual strategy to deal with the paradoxes of universality. Punning is taken not as an addition or embellishment but as a poignant way to propose a new status of universality, related to what Lacan named lalangue. The three different perspectives try to show the different ways by which Santner's work addresses the core conundrums of modernity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper endeavors to argue that Derrida's deconstructionist ethics can be construed as an embodiment of immanent ethics. To achieve this goal, it commences with Friedrich Nietzsche's articulation of immanent ethics, drawing a contrast with formalist and conformist accounts of morality, exemplified in Kant. Following that, the paper explores the ethical thoughts of Michel Foucault and Gilles Deleuze to establish a connection between immanent ethics and the problem of life. In this context, we observe how immanent ethics redirects ethical concerns from human consciousness to the domain of life, modes of existence, the unconscious desire and its exteriority. Within this framework, the paper characterizes Derrida's ethics of deconstruction as a convergence of the immanence of deconstruction and deconstruction as a creative mode of life. As a result, Derrida's formulation of ethical challenges within the context of aporias, impossibility, and responsibility can be understood as a call for resistance against conformity to established forms of life. This imbues deconstruction with an intrinsic ethical-political character. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper focuses on the relationships that Derrida establishes between three analytic discussions and three autoimmunities. The analytic discussions are (1) the antinomy of hospitality, related to what happens when the subject faces demands from strangers; (2) the antinomy of the death penalty, related to the meeting between the right to life and the right to end the life of another; (3) the antinomy of animality related to laws and what lies beyond them. The autoimmunities are (1) the autoimmunity of inclusion: democracy is open only to its sovereign citizens while it claims to welcome all who are excluded; (2) the autoimmunity of rights and liberties: in liberal democracy, rights and liberties are meant to challenge sovereignty's absolutism, but any attack on sovereignty is an attack on rights and liberties; (3) the autoimmunity of globalization: for democracy to work it requires protection provided by a supersovereignty, which limits the sovereignty of states, and hence, democracy. The paper follows Derrida's connections between the questions of hospitality, the death penalty, and animality on the one hand, and the autoimmune aspects of democratic politics on the other, to argue that his deconstruction of democracy is an ethicization of democracy activated by the concept of sovereignty, and a deconstruction of sovereignty via ethics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The so-called Kulturkampf, the conflict between the German Reich and the Catholic Church in the 1870s and 1880s, is one of the most important ideological conflicts of the late nineteenth century and reveals a political theological dynamic characteristic of the modern (German) nation state. This paper analyzes the paradoxes of this conflict along the lines with Eric Santner's analysis of political representations. During the Kulturkampf, Catholic citizens were publicly suspected of not being loyal Germans, and the Catholic Church is widely figured as an (inner) enemy in the liberal press and in modern caricatures. In these polemics, numerous political theological figures emerge: images of a gendered relation of domination of the (female) church by the (male) state, phantasies of the body politic and its precarious unity as well as of its purification respectively of the extermination of its others that continue to determine other ideological conflicts in the twentieth century. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article explores a number of closely related concepts in Eric Santner's wide-ranging and yet concentrated oeuvre: the concept of the flesh, which is at the center of The Royal Remains, along with two more recent additions to Santner's lexicon, the "void of knowledge" and "surplus scarcity," both developed in Untying Things Together. Examining the logic and correlation of these concepts, the paper seeks to highlight certain tensions in Santner's thought but also the possibilities his analyses of human stasis offer. Alfred Döblin's modernist classic Berlin Alexanderplatz then serves as a short test case (but also counterexample) of what we might call, taking our cues from Santner's thinking, the "dreamwork of modernism." [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper gives an account of the most significant elements of Derrida's ethical thought, drawing on the desert of the Hebrew Bible, which Derrida associates with a moral law that is ethically troubling. Partly with reference to Kierkegaard's account of the story of Abraham and Isaac, Derrida examines how ethical law can become subordinate to the sovereignty of the power apparently at the source of ethics which may then destroy moral law. The political equivalent of this is the decision proposed by Carl Schmitt, drawing on Kierkegaard. Derrida's famous statement that "deconstruction is justice" is the recognition that justice, and ethics in general, is caught between the formality of law and the violence of the sovereign power. One outcome of this is sacrifice as substitution, where ethics becomes recompense for violation through sacrifice. Sacrifice is the offering of a substitute. The substitution becomes repeated and itself is then the source of violence contravening some sense of ethics. Derrida's attempts to escape from these deserts include a poetics which recognises the subjective and the aesthetic in the interpretation of law. It also includes the development of a form of sacrifice which is the individual responding to violation in an individualised way which cannot be substituted. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper investigates the ethics of deconstruction by considering it as a form of "resultless" thinking in the sense Hannah Arendt gave to that term: as the destabilization rather than the production of rules, norms, and criteria. In section II, I distinguish deconstruction's specific resultlessness from Arendtian "self-destruction," skeptical suspension, and Socratic irony, for whom resultlessness issues from the symmetrical cancelling out of equal counter-arguments. To the foremost objection to the resultlessness of thinking (the Arendtian "danger" that thinking is unable to respond to the urgent demand for results), deconstruction opposes a reconceptualization of the very notions of "urgency" and "danger." But such reconceptualization still does not amount to a justification for a deconstructive ethics: I argue in section III that deconstruction always performatively relates to a threefold danger that constitutes its "anxiety." At the core of this anxiety is the resistance to reassurance and "good conscience." I conclude, in section IV, by asking whether the ethics of deconstruction can perhaps be qualified – if not through its results or principles – as a "fundamental attunement" [Grundstimmung], by comparing deconstruction's anxiety to Kierkegaard's resistance to righteousness and good conscience, in the latter's revaluation of wonder as the fundamental attunement of philosophy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper sheds light on the relation of mutual exclusion and implication that binds Derridean ethics with the figure of God. In rupture with existing scholarship that categorizes Derridean ethics as either radically atheistic or dialectically pertaining to the Judeo-Christian moral order, I put forward the argument that Derrida's ethical thinking is best considered outside of the dialectics of a/theism. I demonstrate that, far from plainly disproving or falling within the bounds of existing religious discourses, Derrida inaugurates a new way of relating to the absolute – whether it be named God, the infinitely other, or justice – beyond nihilism and idealism, atheism and theism, or more precisely between the two, in a space Derrida refers to as the space of spectrality. I thereby hope to finally do justice to the subtlety of Derridean ethics and foster the recognition that, twenty years after Derrida's death, his ghosts can be of use in tackling some of the greatest ethical and political challenges of the twenty-first century, including the pursuit of peaceful pluralism in the context of rampant violence carried out in the name of God. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper aims to present Derrida's reflections on Europe, which criticizes Europe's actuality while recognizing its promise to-come. Europe in modernity has been conceptualized as sovereign heading, the only one capable of governing the world. Derrida hopes for a Europe other than a super-state, closed within its borders, and an economic alliance. He works on today's Enlightenment, that is, on a new shape of Europe as a shoreline fit to welcome the other, following in the footsteps of Kant, who redefined the right of hospitality and drafted a cosmopolitan order, but going beyond his sketch. In the global age Europe must exemplarily assume The law of hospitality as its key principle, constantly seeking to translate it into political and legal acts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper delves into the deconstruction of the notion of responsibility, drawing a correlation with the process of decomposition of the concept of sovereignty as discussed by Derrida in his last research works. We explore Derrida's consideration of absolute responsibility as no longer passing through the figure of the sovereign. Derrida's thought takes its distance from the philosophical and hegemonic determination of the notion of responsibility, for the conceptual system of its axiomatic defines responsibility based on the sovereign individual's freedom and makes responsibility the effect of his power. Yet, this definition condemns ethics to failure, since it does not account for the other supposed in the idea of response. Derrida incorporates absolute singularity, and consequently secrecy, into the structure of responsibility, enabling thought to encounter the absolute other. The text outlines the influence of Nietzsche and Celan in Derrida's thought and develops an approach that sees in his work the effort to create a poetic revolution in the history of philosophy and knowledge by opening thought to radical alterity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this paper, I propose that Derrida's writing on the impossibility of justice has the potential for fruitful dialogue with Ruth Chang's contemporary account of practical rationality. For Derrida, making a just decision must always come with a moment of undecidability, a "leap" into the unknown with an experience of doubt and anxiety that continues to "haunt" the decision-maker. By contrast, in her work on rationality, Chang proposes that hard decisions are difficult to make because the alternatives are "on a par," such that there are no rational differences between the alternatives that would contribute to choosing one over the other. Hard decisions are made by expressing one's own rational agency, generating will-based reasons to commit to or "drift" into one of the alternatives. Derrida writes of anxiety, doubt, and impossibility, yet Chang writes of commitment, agency, and rationality. Despite these differences, there are important comparisons and connections between the two accounts that are worth exploring. I suggest that the moment of the decision which Derrida describes as heterogeneous to knowledge can be understood as a moment of parity in which there is a lack of given reasons, as explained by Chang. Chang's account of rational agency provides an interpretation of how decision-making is possible despite the undecidability as described by Derrida. This notion of commitment and agency as explained by Chang is not incompatible with Derrida's insistence that the responsible decision is haunted by anxiety and doubt. Instead, I suggest that Derrida's writing highlights uncertainty as central to understanding the nature of hard choices and how to navigate the demands of justice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper intends above all to highlight three fundamental interconnected questions: (1) without reifying it in a theoretical-systematic philosophy, to highlight Derrida's Deconstruction as a "philosophical idiom" – that of différance or of the ab-solute otherness – endowed, therefore, with specific "theoretical" assumptions (khôra, messianic and trace); (2) to highlight and to clarify the meaning of the "Derridian exception" concerning the issue of the animal and animality within the context of the sacrificial philosophical-cultural Westernness; (3) to highlight the relevance of the issue of the animal and animality in order to re-think, in new terms, the question of the human itself – still essentially structured in the light of a metaphysical subjectivity –, underlining the invaluable contribution of Deconstruction to rethink the exceptionality of the human among the living beings and to bring the war for compassion to a successful end, thus contributing to the emergence of new Lights for the promise of the "coming" ["à-venir"] of another humanity and, consequently, of another civilization. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Most countries provide some form of nationality or citizenship either by birthright or inheritance. This paper accepts Jacques Derrida's invitation to imagine nationality or citizenship otherwise, this time by death and burial: you are from where you die or are buried. I read Derrida's invitation alongside his four studies of Martin Heidegger's use of "Geschlecht" to argue that we ought to reconsider the relationship between the nation and (its) philosophy. I show that Derrida's proposed "law of the eclipse" provides us new resources to rethink nationalism today. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]