A Re-evaluation of the Androcentric Subject of European Philosophy

IF 0.4 Q3 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY
W. Verkerk
{"title":"A Re-evaluation of the Androcentric Subject of European Philosophy","authors":"W. Verkerk","doi":"10.1080/14409917.2023.2233109","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This paper takes Cavarero’s arguments against the Homo erectus seriously and asks: how can we model an alternative to it? It proposes that a notion of the mimetically inclined subject is required, one that thickens Cavarero’s affirmative account of inclination by way of a new philosophical understanding of mimesis that includes habit and disciplinarity. Following Cavarero, the mother is positioned as a key figure to place nurturing and love at the centre of subject-making. However, they are shown to be a necessary but not sufficient step for the process of re-evaluation. An account of disciplinary mimesis which draws on a Nietzschean legacy in Michel Foucault and Judith Butler, together with Simone de Beauvoir’s account of woman as a situation, demonstrate the pitfalls of idealizing the mother. I argue that to challenge the particularized universalism of the European subject with an affirmative account of mimetic inclination, other figures which embrace Cavarero’s notion of relational vulnerability alongside the mother are required. The agonistic friend who practices an open, feminist curiosity is proposed as one such exemplar and, in closing remarks, I gesture to other necessary models in feminist and Indigenous thought that are key to remaking the androcentric subject of European philosophy.","PeriodicalId":51905,"journal":{"name":"Critical Horizons","volume":"24 1","pages":"115 - 130"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Critical Horizons","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14409917.2023.2233109","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

ABSTRACT This paper takes Cavarero’s arguments against the Homo erectus seriously and asks: how can we model an alternative to it? It proposes that a notion of the mimetically inclined subject is required, one that thickens Cavarero’s affirmative account of inclination by way of a new philosophical understanding of mimesis that includes habit and disciplinarity. Following Cavarero, the mother is positioned as a key figure to place nurturing and love at the centre of subject-making. However, they are shown to be a necessary but not sufficient step for the process of re-evaluation. An account of disciplinary mimesis which draws on a Nietzschean legacy in Michel Foucault and Judith Butler, together with Simone de Beauvoir’s account of woman as a situation, demonstrate the pitfalls of idealizing the mother. I argue that to challenge the particularized universalism of the European subject with an affirmative account of mimetic inclination, other figures which embrace Cavarero’s notion of relational vulnerability alongside the mother are required. The agonistic friend who practices an open, feminist curiosity is proposed as one such exemplar and, in closing remarks, I gesture to other necessary models in feminist and Indigenous thought that are key to remaking the androcentric subject of European philosophy.
重新评价欧洲哲学的男权主体
摘要本文认真对待卡瓦雷罗反对直立人的论点,并提出一个问题:我们如何建模一个替代直立人的模型?它提出需要一个模仿倾向主体的概念,通过对模仿的新的哲学理解,包括习惯性和纪律性,使卡瓦雷罗对倾向的肯定性描述更加丰富。继卡瓦雷罗之后,母亲被定位为将养育和爱置于主题制作中心的关键人物。然而,它们被证明是重新评估过程中必要但不充分的步骤。米歇尔·福柯(Michel Foucault)和朱迪斯·巴特勒(Judith Butler。我认为,为了用对模仿倾向的肯定描述来挑战欧洲主题的特殊普遍主义,需要其他人物与母亲一起接受卡瓦雷罗的关系脆弱性概念。这位痛苦的朋友践行着开放的、女权主义的好奇心,被认为是这样一个例子,在结束语中,我向女权主义和土著思想中的其他必要模式致敬,这些模式是重塑欧洲哲学以男性为中心的主题的关键。
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
Critical Horizons
Critical Horizons SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
18
×
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