Search

This paper explores the distinction of politics and the political in Castoriadis' work. Whereas the political refers to the instituted as the management of society in accordance with established laws, politics refers to the instituting as the capacity of the imaginary to constantly challenge established laws on the basis of individual and collective autonomy. The politics of autonomy identify with the regime of direct democracy, established first and foremost at the level of economy and expanding accordingly in all spheres of society. Democracy contains both a psychoanalytical and educational perspective inasmuch as it aims at the conscious self-reflective harmonisation of individual and collective autonomy by means of collective deliberation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This essay compares the ideas of Cornelius Castoriadis and Terrence W. Deacon. Castoriadis’s anti-Naturalistic ontology, with its conception of radical ontological creation and fundamental indeterminacy, along with his analysis of the category of the “for-itself”, comprising all subjective beings from the living organism to the social-historical, is compared to Deacon’s exploration of the emergence of life and mind, which sees the emergence of teleological beings as resulting from the creation of form-generating constraints that involve new types of dynamic process. Significant parallels and convergences between Castoriadis and Deacon are uncovered and explored. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Beginning with a consideration of Castoriadis’s elucidation ofautonomousthinking, both by way of the contrast he draws with the inherited tradition and in relation to his account of the demands of the political project of autonomy, we compare Plato’s story of the Cave to suggest that Castoriadis overestimates the power of questioning and of creating new social forms. We then argue that Castoriadis and Plato emerge as two extremes: whereas the first favours the power of questioning to the exclusion of receiving value, the second privileges the power of receiving over creation and creativity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article examines the use and interpretation of the concept of nothingness in Martin Heidegger and Jean-Paul Sartre's twentieth century philosophy. It explores the connection between this concept of nothingness and philosopher Cornelius Castoriadis' radical ontology of indeterminacy. It also discusses the relationship of Castoriadis to Heidegger and Sartre.

An essay on the political imaginary and its relevance on the American political formation. It explores the articulations of political philosophers Cornelius Castoriadis and Claude Lefort of concepts on human autonomy, political power, and democracy, presenting contrasts in their view of the U.S. Constitution. It also examines aspects of the political imaginary in the works of Thomas Jefferson and Simon Bolivar.

The article presents the exposition of political theorist Cornelius Castoriadis on the concepts of the social imaginaries and social doing. It links Castoriadis with the philosophical elaboration of non-subjective doing which has allegedly been not included in debates on social and political action. It also examines articulations on praxis, political autonomy, and cultural movement.

An essay is presented discusses the concept of survival within the context of validity de facto and validity de jure as expounded by political philosopher Cornelius Castoriadis. It examines implications of trends in depoliticization on political and economic theory that allegedly has given rise to right wing populism and extremism. It also discusses these trends with the notion of political imaginaries that is a core idea of Castoriadis.

The article discusses Herbert Marcuse's concept of non-repressive sublimation by comparing it with the understanding of psychic socialization by Cornelius Castoriadis. When compared to Castoriadis' understanding, the author says that Marcuse's concept can be interpreted as a radical democratic that carries the values of autonomy and creativity. The author adds that Marcuse's view of self-limitation as a form of self-sublimation does not mean it is a process of private energetic discharge.

The article discusses Cornelius Castsoriadis' clarifications on his ideas on creation from nothing. It says Castoriadis does not argue against the principle that says everything is determined according to laws made by something else, as formulated by Mario Bunge, but the one that says this something else is the external and the internal conditions of the object in question. The philosophy of Parmenides of Elea, who believed that the universe is unchanging, is cited.

The article aims to draw explicit links between democracy, tragedy and paradox. It examines the political ascendancy of tragedy and its relation with the birth of democracy in ancient Athens. It also highlights the autonomous idea and practice of Athenian democracy by means of drawing out the paradoxical essence of human existence captured by Athenian tragedy.

The article reports on the understanding of democracy and the risk of the cancellation of democracy in terms of relationship between people and institutions. It explains the historical notes on the downfall of democracies. It cites the argument that democracy is ineffective and tragic. It mentions that an autonomy is a tragic feature of democracy. Also explained are the limits to democracy, the temporary self-cancellation of democracy and an analysis of answers to the question of whether people are living in democracies.

The article looks at the reflexivity model of sociologist Émile Durkheim in post-classical attitude and in relation to political modernity. It compares the collective representation of Durkheim with social imaginaries of philosopher Cornelius Castoriadis. It examines the cultures of reflexivity in the notions of collective representation of Durkheim. The author stresses that the triadic culture of science, history and linguistics offer more complex formulation of reflexive culture than the views of Durkheim on Cartesianism.

The article compares the views of philosophers Cornelius Castoriadis and Kostas Papaioannou on the relationship between tragedy and politics of Greece. It says that the political begins with revolution for Papaioannou and self-institution for Castoriadis. It explores the concepts of both philosophers on heteronomy and theological source of power which affect their views on tragedy and politics. The article discusses the differences and pitfalls of the democracy model of Castoriadis and masses of Papaioannou in relation to justice.

The article examines the connection between oligarchy and representative democracy according to philosopher Cornelius Castoriadis. He describes Western regimes as representative democracies when the people transfer their autonomy to a group of people who do not refer their actions to their electors. It compares the views of Castoriadis and fellow philosopher Claude Lefort on direct versus representative democracy. Castoriadis also defines oligarchy as an exercise of power and an expression of bureaucratic society.

The article explores the views of philosopher Cornelius Castoriadis on Marxism. In 1975, Castoriadis published the book "The Imaginary Institution of Society" to expose what he perceives as hidden connection of Marxism to metaphysics. He then published an essay on the failure of Marxism as a revolutionary theory and its historical reductionism. He also criticizes positivism in relation to the economic and labour theories of Marxism.

The article discusses the contribution of the contemporary French social theory founded by philosophers Cornelius Castoriadis and Claude Lefort in the understanding of human power. It explores the cultural power of the social imaginary of Castoriadis and its opposition to modernity and autonomy. The article adds that Lefort redefined heteronomy as denial of history to counter change. It compares the views of Lefort and sociologist Émile Durkheim on the political role of ideology and religion.

The aim of this paper is to examine two turns towards the idea of the creative imagination in contemporary critical theory in the works of Axel Honneth and Cornelius Castoriadis. Honneth's work subsumes the idea of the creative imagination under the paradigm of mutual recognition. Castoriadis constructs the idea of the creative imagination from an ontological perspective. However, Castoriadis' idea of the primary autism of the creative imagination can be thrown into relief by Hegel's Jena Lectures. Hegel's and Castoriadis' work opens onto a subjectivity in tension, that is, a subjectivity that is forged out of a combination of subjective interiority, as well as the patterns of interaction that are multidimensional in their scope and create social spaces that force the subject beyond an initial closure. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The central claim of this essay is that Habermas' program of discourse ethics fails to establish the necessary immanent connection between the universality of discourse ethics and the quasi-transcendentalism, which is supposed to provide its ground. Habermas' attempt to avoid the spectre of subjectivism leads him to develop an understanding of universalism that hinges on a critical error, the confusion of subjectivity with ethical substance. Using Castoriadis' theory of the imagination to illuminate this failure, I demonstrate the way in which Habermas' moral theory of discourse inadvertently harbours a moral-imaginary horizon, a pre-political kernel which undercuts its capacity to serve as a universalist ethic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]