劳,万王之王:施密特、阿甘本、平达

IF 0.3 Q3 LAW
Lukas van den Berge
{"title":"劳,万王之王:施密特、阿甘本、平达","authors":"Lukas van den Berge","doi":"10.1080/17521483.2019.1670898","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Both Carl Schmitt and Giorgio Agamben draw on the ancient Greek concept of nomos as an important element underpinning their legal theories. Aiming to restore that concept to its pre-sophistic meaning, they grant central weight to a piece of poetry in which Pindar famously proclaims that ‘law (nomos) is king of all’, guiding both mortals and immortals while ‘justifying the utmost violence with a powerful hand’. For Schmitt as for Agamben, this means that the Pindaric fragment exposes the violent origins of law that normativist jurisprudence typically shields from view. For one thing, I will explain in this article why Schmitt’s and Agamben’s use of the fragment is at odds with any acceptable interpretation of it in its wider literary and historical context. More importantly, perhaps, my aim is ultimately to reconstruct a Pindaric jurisprudence as it should actually be preferred to that of both Schmitt and Agamben.","PeriodicalId":42313,"journal":{"name":"Law and Humanities","volume":"13 1","pages":"198 - 222"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2019-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17521483.2019.1670898","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Law, king of all: Schmitt, Agamben, Pindar\",\"authors\":\"Lukas van den Berge\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/17521483.2019.1670898\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT Both Carl Schmitt and Giorgio Agamben draw on the ancient Greek concept of nomos as an important element underpinning their legal theories. Aiming to restore that concept to its pre-sophistic meaning, they grant central weight to a piece of poetry in which Pindar famously proclaims that ‘law (nomos) is king of all’, guiding both mortals and immortals while ‘justifying the utmost violence with a powerful hand’. For Schmitt as for Agamben, this means that the Pindaric fragment exposes the violent origins of law that normativist jurisprudence typically shields from view. For one thing, I will explain in this article why Schmitt’s and Agamben’s use of the fragment is at odds with any acceptable interpretation of it in its wider literary and historical context. More importantly, perhaps, my aim is ultimately to reconstruct a Pindaric jurisprudence as it should actually be preferred to that of both Schmitt and Agamben.\",\"PeriodicalId\":42313,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Law and Humanities\",\"volume\":\"13 1\",\"pages\":\"198 - 222\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-07-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17521483.2019.1670898\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Law and Humanities\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/17521483.2019.1670898\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Law and Humanities","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17521483.2019.1670898","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

摘要:施密特和阿甘本都借鉴了古希腊的诺姆斯概念,认为诺姆斯是他们法律理论的重要基础。为了将这一概念恢复到其诡辩之前的意义,他们对一首诗给予了中心重视,在这首诗中,平达著名地宣称“法律(nomos)是万物之王”,指导凡人和神仙,同时“用强有力的手为最大的暴力辩护”。对施密特和阿甘本来说,这意味着平达里克的片段暴露了法律的暴力起源,而规范主义法学通常会将其屏蔽在视野之外。首先,我将在这篇文章中解释为什么施密特和阿甘本对碎片的使用与在更广泛的文学和历史背景下对它的任何可接受的解释都不一致。也许更重要的是,我的目标最终是重建一个平达尔法学,因为它实际上应该比施密特和阿甘本的法学更可取。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Law, king of all: Schmitt, Agamben, Pindar
ABSTRACT Both Carl Schmitt and Giorgio Agamben draw on the ancient Greek concept of nomos as an important element underpinning their legal theories. Aiming to restore that concept to its pre-sophistic meaning, they grant central weight to a piece of poetry in which Pindar famously proclaims that ‘law (nomos) is king of all’, guiding both mortals and immortals while ‘justifying the utmost violence with a powerful hand’. For Schmitt as for Agamben, this means that the Pindaric fragment exposes the violent origins of law that normativist jurisprudence typically shields from view. For one thing, I will explain in this article why Schmitt’s and Agamben’s use of the fragment is at odds with any acceptable interpretation of it in its wider literary and historical context. More importantly, perhaps, my aim is ultimately to reconstruct a Pindaric jurisprudence as it should actually be preferred to that of both Schmitt and Agamben.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
21
期刊介绍: Law and Humanities is a peer-reviewed journal, providing a forum for scholarly discourse within the arts and humanities around the subject of law. For this purpose, the arts and humanities disciplines are taken to include literature, history (including history of art), philosophy, theology, classics and the whole spectrum of performance and representational arts. The remit of the journal does not extend to consideration of the laws that regulate practical aspects of the arts and humanities (such as the law of intellectual property). Law and Humanities is principally concerned to engage with those aspects of human experience which are not empirically quantifiable or scientifically predictable. Each issue will carry four or five major articles of between 8,000 and 12,000 words each. The journal will also carry shorter papers (up to 4,000 words) sharing good practice in law and humanities education; reports of conferences; reviews of books, exhibitions, plays, concerts and other artistic publications.
×
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