By David Pan · Monday, October 3, 2022 Telos 200 (Fall 2022): The Place of Truth at the University is now available for purchase in our store. Individual subscriptions to Telos are also available in both print and online formats.
 The place of truth at the university has always been elsewhere. Scientific conclusions are after all hypotheses, subject to continuing examination and critique in a process that forever defers the arrival at a final truth. In addition to this unbridgeable temporal distance from truth, there is a spatial distance to the extent that the university is subject to a larger purposive context that stands outside of scientific activity itself. A researcher can be objective by being non-prejudicial in collecting facts and weighing arguments but can never be neutral in terms of the goals of the research, which must always be established before the research begins and from outside of the research project itself.[1] Research cannot begin until an interest in some question has been expressed, and such an interest has generally not been up to the researcher to decide. Whether the goal of medical research will be to protect humans from a virus or attack humans with a virus will be determined by the sponsor of the research rather than the researcher, who at best may decline to take part in some forms of research. If the determiners of the goals of the university are not the professors themselves but the society that sponsors their work, it is within this external values framework that the truth of the university must be found.
Continue reading →
By Peter Brandt · Wednesday, April 28, 2021 The following blog post originally appeared at Blog politische Ökonomie. Peter Brandt is commenting on the controversy surrounding an essay by Wolfgang Thierse, translated here. See the related position paper here and a separate article by Brandt here. Translated by Russell A. Berman, with comments here.
During the past few weeks the debate over identity politics and viewpoint diversity in Germany has been unfolding. The starting point was an article in the Frankfurter Allgemeine by Wolfgang Thierse, not known for eccentric positions, concerning the conduct of the debate around the themes of racism, postcolonialism, and gender.
In his opinion piece, Thierse criticizes the claim by sexual and other minorities to define their own collective identity (hence “identity politics”), and what is right and tolerable or intolerable for them, rather than engaging in an open and controversial debate. The accusation that something is hurtful therefore, Thierse argues, often displaces an argumentative response.
Continue reading →
By Position Paper · Wednesday, April 28, 2021 The following position paper circulated in Germany in late March here. It is part of a wider discussion of identity politics, especially the opinion piece by Wolfgang Thierse, translated in TelosScope here. See also the comments by one of the signators, Peter Brandt, here and here, and comments by the translator, Russell A. Berman, here.
We, the undersigned of this position paper, understand ourselves to be critical, progressive, open-minded, and ecologically oriented. We support deep ecological and social changes in our society. However we want to do this without identitarian fundamentalism! With this position paper we want to . . .
Continue reading →
By Russell A. Berman · Tuesday, November 10, 2020 In the wake of recent killings in Paris and Nice, as well as in Vienna, the debate over “Islamism” has regained prominence in Europe, especially in France. Islamism as a political ideology must of course be rigorously distinguished from Islam, the religion. That conceptual distinction ought to be readily understandable and familiar from previous iterations of responses to terrorism. What however appears to be new in the current French discussion is the perceived linkage between Islamism, terrorist violence, and academic post-colonialism, regarded as providing a justification for the violence. That association is being made at high levels in the Macron government, generating considerable controversy. That is the context for the open letter published in Le Monde, translated below. Do academic ideas have consequences in the world?
Continue reading →
By Telos Press · Monday, July 20, 2020 The following interview was conducted by Alexander Wendt on July 5, 2020, and originally appeared in German on Tichys Einblick on July 13, 2020. Translated by Russell A. Berman.
Alexander Wendt: Professor Bolz, the costs of the coronavirus pandemic are still unknown, but they will surely leave deep scars for years to come. Will our society return from post-materialism to a society with hard materialist concerns with numbers and balance sheets?
Norbert Bolz: Even before the coronavirus crisis, I had doubts as to whether the notion of a post-material society made much sense. To my mind, the “post-material” term only makes real sense as a description of digitalization and the rise of information technology. But the superstructure that is usually meant by “post-material” seems to me to be mainly a substitute for religion, and it never had the real significance for society that many ascribe to it.
Continue reading →
By Andrew Reszitnyk · Thursday, May 21, 2020 Andrew Reszitnyk’s “The Descent into Disanthropy: Critical Theory and the Anthropocene” appears in Telos 190 (Spring 2020): Economy and Ecology: Reconceiving the Human Relationship to Nature. Read the full article at the Telos Online website, or purchase a print copy of the issue in our online store. Individual subscriptions to Telos are available in both print and online formats. Ernst Jünger’s Sturm, published in English translation by Telos Press, is also available in our store.
 This essay suggests that the widespread engagement in humanities scholarship with the concept of the Anthropocene—the proposed geologic epoch in which humans figure as a terrestrial force and the planet appears as a human artifact—has given rise to a strain of critical theory that renounces the imperative to engage in politics. I argue that the notion of the Anthropocene has inspired a turn toward what Greg Garrard calls “disanthropy,” the tendency to fantasize about a world in which living human bodies are absent and to render human life into an abstract concept. Through an analysis of the work of Dipesh Chakrabarty and Timothy Morton, I contend that, insofar as they have become disanthropic, many contemporary critical theorists have relinquished the capacity to engage critically with the influential and pernicious politico-economic ideology of neoliberalism. Although many scholars argue that we should view the Anthropocene as a vital provocation that opens up new corridors for environmentalist scholarship, I propose that we remain skeptical about the value of positing the Anthropocene at the center of critical inquiry. I suggest that the growing reputation of the idea of the Anthropocene has caused a significant segment of humanistic scholarship to enter into a political and philosophical détente with neoliberalism, with the effect that critical theory is becoming less and less capable of responding to the questions posed by the world outside the university.
Continue reading →
|
|
