Introduction

Dieleman, Susan; Rondel, David; Voparil, Christopher J.

doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780190459239.003.0001

Cited by 2 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…At the philosophical core of this tradition, Axel Honneth (Honneth, 1998a(Honneth, , 1998b(Honneth, , 2014 has particularly drawn on the formative argument to develop his account of social freedom and democracy while Rahel Jaeggi's influential account of the critique of forms of life draws on a Deweyan account of forms of life and their criticism as experimental problem-solving (Jaeggi, 2018: 318). 5 Outside this tradition, philosophers such as Elizabeth Anderson and David Rondel draw on Dewey's social philosophy to inform current problem-focused explorations of structural injustice (Anderson, 2011;Dieleman et al, 2017;Rondel, 2018) Both in Dewey's own work and recensions, these two arguments and the relationship between them are highly contentious. We can ask whether experimentalism avoids, on the one hand, appeal to a priori standards for the success of social inquiry or, on the other, appeal to the local ethnocentric convention.…”

Section: Pragmatism In the Conversation Of Contemporary Political Theorymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…At the philosophical core of this tradition, Axel Honneth (Honneth, 1998a, 1998b, 2014) has particularly drawn on the formative argument to develop his account of social freedom and democracy while Rahel Jaeggi's influential account of the critique of forms of life draws on a Deweyan account of forms of life and their criticism as experimental problem-solving (Jaeggi, 2018: 318). 5 Outside this tradition, philosophers such as Elizabeth Anderson and David Rondel draw on Dewey's social philosophy to inform current problem-focused explorations of structural injustice (Anderson, 2011; Dieleman et al, 2017; Rondel, 2018).…”

Section: Pragmatism In the Conversation Of Contemporary Political Theorymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Spotlight: Pragmatism in contemporary political theory

Festenstein

2021

European Journal of Political Theory

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article surveys recent work in pragmatism and political theory. In doing so, it shows both how recent work on pragmatism has secured the view that at its core is a set of arguments about the character of democracy – although the character of those arguments is open to debate and reimagination – and how pragmatist arguments have been reinterpreted and deployed to address contemporary concerns and approaches. This charts a terrain of live disagreements rather than settled opinion.

show abstract

Section: Pragmatism In the Conversation Of Contemporary Political Theorymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Pragmatism In the Conversation Of Contemporary Political Theorymentioning

confidence: 99%

Spotlight: Pragmatism in contemporary political theory

Festenstein

2021

European Journal of Political Theory

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…3 There has been increased interest in the methods adopted in political theory (Blau 2017;Herzog and Zacka 2019;Leopold and Stears 2008;Scavenius 2017), and an ongoing discussion about methods in normative political theory (Miller 2002;Mills 2005;Sangiovanni 2007;Simmons 2010;Stemplowska 2008). There has, however, been less work on the methods involved in normative political theory that aspires to start from lived experiences of injustice, with notable exceptions in feminist and pragmatist political theory (Dieleman, Rondel, and Voparil 2017;Jaggar 2014). 4 See Hoover (2017) for more on this point.…”

Section: Politics Of and For Responsibilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Taking responsibility in an unjust world

Hoover

2019

Journal of International Political Theory

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Our is an age of irresponsibility and injustice. The associations that make responsibility and justice possible have broken down due to negligence, deliberate subversion, and changed social conditions. To be responsible is to be bound by legitimate social rules and to be able to demand recognition of the social rules from others. Responsibility is the activity of calling and responding appropriately in our social transactions, while justice, most simply, is our reflective judgment of the quality of the rules and practices by which we live. Our responsibility, and our capacity to be responsible, is dependent upon the justice of the rules and practices with which we organise social life, upon the fairness of the way we bind ourselves together. Justice and responsibility, then, are associational concepts that characterise our relationships, as well as the norms and institutions through which those relationships are built. Therefore, to live in an irresponsible and unjust age means social rules and practices fail us, as our actual experience is not adequately reflected in the institutional and normative world we inherit. We no longer know how to respond to each other.Convention in political theory dictates we work out an ideal conception of justice, which provides a guide for the non-ideal world of lived experience. Yet, the irresponsible and unjust character of our age leads to alienation from the world of common experience, to feeling

show abstract

Introduction

Cited by 2 publications

References 0 publications

Spotlight: Pragmatism in contemporary political theory

Spotlight: Pragmatism in contemporary political theory

Taking responsibility in an unjust world

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About