State Legibility and Mind Legibility in the Original Political Society

IF 0.6 0 RELIGION
Sondra L. Hausner, D. Eck, J. Hawley, R. Mehrotra, J. A. Whitaker, Igor Mikeshin, S. Hillewaert, Chantal Tetreault, Emily Riley, Javier Jiménez-Royo, Josh Bullock, M. Guillot, C. Carter, Evgenia Fotiou, A. Clot, Essi Mäkelä, Andrés Felipe Agudelo, Diana Espírito Santo, K. Wirtz, Joana Martins, Jon Bialecki, J. Robbins, Richard Baxstrom
{"title":"State Legibility and Mind Legibility in the Original Political Society","authors":"Sondra L. Hausner, D. Eck, J. Hawley, R. Mehrotra, J. A. Whitaker, Igor Mikeshin, S. Hillewaert, Chantal Tetreault, Emily Riley, Javier Jiménez-Royo, Josh Bullock, M. Guillot, C. Carter, Evgenia Fotiou, A. Clot, Essi Mäkelä, Andrés Felipe Agudelo, Diana Espírito Santo, K. Wirtz, Joana Martins, Jon Bialecki, J. Robbins, Richard Baxstrom","doi":"10.3167/arrs.2021.120104","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In one of his last great provocations, Marshall Sahlins describes the ‘original political society’ as a society where supposedly ‘egalitarian’ relations between humans are subordinated to the government of metahuman beings. He argues that this government is ‘a state’, but what kind of state does he mean? Even if metahumans are hierarchically organized and have power over human beings, they lack two capacities commonly attributed to political states: systematic means to make populations legible and coercive means to identity the intentions of others. The nascent forms of state legibility and public mind reading that are present in Sahlins’s original political society are not unified and tied to particular agents. A discussion of the limitations of state and mind legibility points to the fundamental correlations between those two forms of legibility and their co-implication in whatever might be called ‘the state’.","PeriodicalId":42823,"journal":{"name":"Religion and Society-Advances in Research","volume":"16 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2021-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Religion and Society-Advances in Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3167/arrs.2021.120104","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"RELIGION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

In one of his last great provocations, Marshall Sahlins describes the ‘original political society’ as a society where supposedly ‘egalitarian’ relations between humans are subordinated to the government of metahuman beings. He argues that this government is ‘a state’, but what kind of state does he mean? Even if metahumans are hierarchically organized and have power over human beings, they lack two capacities commonly attributed to political states: systematic means to make populations legible and coercive means to identity the intentions of others. The nascent forms of state legibility and public mind reading that are present in Sahlins’s original political society are not unified and tied to particular agents. A discussion of the limitations of state and mind legibility points to the fundamental correlations between those two forms of legibility and their co-implication in whatever might be called ‘the state’.
原始政治社会的状态易读性与心灵易读性
马歇尔·萨林斯(Marshall Sahlins)在他最后一次伟大的挑衅中,将“原始政治社会”描述为一个人类之间所谓的“平等主义”关系服从于超人类政府的社会。他认为这个政府是“一个国家”,但他指的是什么样的国家呢?即使超人类是按等级组织起来的,并且拥有凌驾于人类之上的权力,他们也缺乏两种通常被归因于政治国家的能力:一种是使人口清晰可辨的系统手段,另一种是识别他人意图的强制手段。萨林斯最初的政治社会中出现的国家易读性和公众读心术的新生形式并不是统一的,也不是与特定的代理人联系在一起的。关于状态易读性和精神易读性的局限性的讨论指出了这两种形式的易读性之间的基本关联以及它们在所谓的“状态”中的共同含义。
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
CiteScore
0.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
1
审稿时长
16 weeks
×
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