After Critique: Cynicism, Scepticism and the Politics of Laughter

B. Korf
{"title":"After Critique: Cynicism, Scepticism and the Politics of Laughter","authors":"B. Korf","doi":"10.1177/02632764231211899","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In 1983, two philosophers, Michel Foucault and Peter Sloterdijk, engaged with ancient Cynicism and the outspokenness and laughter of Diogenes as a critical practice. Foucault and Sloterdijk did so to position themselves ‘after’ critique: ‘after’ a period of and ‘beyond’ a certain style of dogmatism and theoretical deadlocks that troubled left thinking in the early 1980s (and continue to do so today). I show how Foucault and Sloterdijk, while differing in their critical politics, both read Diogenes’ politics of truth as radical subversive otherness. While Diogenes performed this antagonizing critique from a subaltern position, his politics nevertheless risked ending up in a self-righteous intransigence to know the truth. As an alternative, I turn to another politics of laughter in Hellenistic philosophy, that of the Thracian Maid, and its sceptical impulse that is situated ‘before’, ‘beyond’ and ‘after’ critique in the space of what Hans Blumenberg calls Nachdenklichkeit (pensiveness).","PeriodicalId":227485,"journal":{"name":"Theory, Culture & Society","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Theory, Culture & Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/02632764231211899","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In 1983, two philosophers, Michel Foucault and Peter Sloterdijk, engaged with ancient Cynicism and the outspokenness and laughter of Diogenes as a critical practice. Foucault and Sloterdijk did so to position themselves ‘after’ critique: ‘after’ a period of and ‘beyond’ a certain style of dogmatism and theoretical deadlocks that troubled left thinking in the early 1980s (and continue to do so today). I show how Foucault and Sloterdijk, while differing in their critical politics, both read Diogenes’ politics of truth as radical subversive otherness. While Diogenes performed this antagonizing critique from a subaltern position, his politics nevertheless risked ending up in a self-righteous intransigence to know the truth. As an alternative, I turn to another politics of laughter in Hellenistic philosophy, that of the Thracian Maid, and its sceptical impulse that is situated ‘before’, ‘beyond’ and ‘after’ critique in the space of what Hans Blumenberg calls Nachdenklichkeit (pensiveness).
批判之后玩世不恭、怀疑主义和笑的政治学
1983 年,两位哲学家米歇尔-福柯(Michel Foucault)和彼得-斯洛特戴克(Peter Sloterdijk)将古代犬儒主义和第欧根尼的直言不讳和大笑作为一种批判实践。福柯和斯洛特迪克这样做是为了将自己定位在 "批判之后":"在 "一段教条主义和理论僵局的时期之后,并 "超越 "这种教条主义和理论僵局,这种教条主义和理论僵局在 20 世纪 80 年代初困扰着左翼思想界(至今仍在困扰着左翼思想界)。我将展示福柯和斯洛特迪克是如何将第欧根尼的真理政治解读为激进的颠覆性他者,虽然他们的批判政治各不相同。虽然第欧根尼从一个次等的立场出发进行了这种对抗性批判,但他的政治学却有可能以一种自以为是的对真理的顽固不化而告终。作为另一种选择,我转向希腊哲学中的另一种笑的政治--色雷斯女仆的笑的政治,及其在汉斯-布卢门贝格所称的 "笔性"(Nachdenklichkeit)空间中 "先于"、"超越 "和 "后于 "批判的怀疑冲动。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信