peter osborne - philosophy after theory - transdisciplinarity and the new

7/27/2019 Peter Osborne - Philosophy After Theory - Transdisciplinarity and the New

1/28

Manuscript submission Jane Elliott and Derek Attridge, eds, Theory After Theory, Routledge, London andNew York, 20! "ubse#uentl$ publis%ed in cop$&edited 'orm as pp! ()** o' t%at +olume!

Philosophy After Theory: Transdisciplinarity and the New

Peter Osborne

n w%at sense is somet%ing called -t%eor$. o+er/ And in w%at wa$ mig%t t%e manner o'

its passing %a+e opened up a space 'or its renewal/ At 'irst sig%t, t%ese #uestions appear

paroc%ial and outmoded! -%eor$. did not end, it lost a brie' and e1traordinar$

institutional %egemon$ a %egemon$ t%at was restricted to particular disciplinar$ sites

wit%in t%e Anglop%one %umanities during its %eroic -3renc%. period 4(56)((678

primaril$, literar$ studies o' +arious sorts 49ussett 200:7! Yet, to con'ine t%is episode to

t%e past would itsel' be to 'all pre$ to 'as%ion! 3or t%ere are deep&seated issues at stake in

t%e struggles around -t%eor$., going as 'ar back as ;erman p%ilosop%$ in t%e last decade

o' t%e eig%teent% centur$, w%ic% not onl$ retain t%eir rele+ance toda$, but %a+e ac#uired

new pertinences ) and not merel$ 'or reasons o' e1pedienc$, associated wit% t%e global

e1pansion o' t%e Englis%&language academic publis%ing industr$! 4-%eor$. is also a

marketing categor$, o' course!7%ese issues concern, among ot%er t%ings, t%e

possibilities and manner o' knowing t%e w%ole ) t%e totalit$ o' conditions t%at pertain to

e1perience ) a #uestion w%ic% %as been gi+en a new lease o' li'e b$ t%e tendentiall$

global dominance o' a single economic s$stem! t appears toda$, in part, as a #uestion

about t%e possibilit$ and modes o' knowing onesel' 4"ocrates.s old #uestion7 as a sub


2/28

connected to t%e 'ate and prospects o' -t%eor$. in t%e Anglop%one %umanities, it will be

use'ul to start wit% a sketc% o' t%e two main traditions o' t%eor$ at issue in t%ese debates!

%e kind o' t%eor$ w%ose moment is supposedl$ past is t%at w%ic% became known

collo#uiall$ in t%e (50s as -%ig% t%eor$., -t%eor$ wit% a capital ., or more polemicall$

but also in +arious wa$s more neutrall$, -critical t%eor$.!High t%eor$ b$ association wit%

uses o' t%e term -%ig%. in t%e Anglican 9%urc% and art criticism 4t%at is, a particular

combination o' ritual, uni+ersalism and e1clusi+it$7 t%eor$ with a capital T, b$ dint o' a

passing use o' capitali>ation b$ Louis Alt%usser critical t%eor$, more +ariousl$, but

largel$ +ia its occupation o' t%e institutional space o' literar$ criticism, in conation, Theoryposits itsel'

as t%e successor to t%ese categories! More ambiguousl$, t%e institutional con+enience

-critical t%eor$. suggests a transition 'rom t%eor$ to practice wit%in t%eor$ itsel', and

%ence wit%in t%e educational practices o' t%e academ$! %is was t%e ground on w%ic% t%e

so&called -culture wars. were 'oug%t in t%e wake o' t%e %e$da$ o' t%eor$ in t%e "A not


3/28

political content o' educational practices in t%e second, it was t%e political rele+ance o'

cultural issues!7

%e p%rase -critical t%eor$. carries more content t%an its popular s$non$ms! ?owe+er,

t%is is more o'ten t%an not seriousl$ misleading, since muc% o' t%e 3renc% work it is now

%abituall$ used to describe operates wit% a notion o' -science. in tension wit%, i' not

direct opposition to, t%e p%ilosop%ical notion o' criti#ue! %is applies to structuralism, in

particular, including its Mar1ist +ariants!2Moreo+er, anot%er signi'icant portion o' t%is

work, part o' t%e ?eideggerian legac$ ) deconstruction, in particular ) was constituted in

e1plicit opposition to t%e claims o' t%eor$, in its classical sense 4;asc%B 20057! n t%is

respect, at least, -critical t%eor$. reall$ did 'unction wit%in t%e Anglo&American academ$

o' t%e (:0s as a mere name 'or a %eterogeneous assemblage o' 3renc%, or 3renc%&

inspired, t%eoretical writings ) a label 'or a list o' t%inkers responding to a common

situation wit% o'ten diametricall$ opposed intellectual pro


4/28

t%e two traditions %a+e in common is t%e t%oug%t t%at t%e$ %a+e surpassed, or at least

displaced, -p%ilosop%$. in its modern disciplinar$ sense!

Theory after Philosophy: Two Traditions

n 3rance, -t%eor$. was an e''ect o', on t%e one %and, conceptual de+elopments in t%e

%uman sciences 4structuralismpost&structuralism7 and, on t%e ot%er, t%e Mar1ist criti#ue

o' p%ilosop%$! Alt%usser 'amousl$ brie'l$ used t%e term Thoriewit% a capital -. to

designate w%at %e %ad pre+iousl$ re'erred to as -Mar1ist p%ilosop%$. 4namel$, -t%e

t%eor$ o' t%eoretical practice.7, in order to -reser+e t%e termphilosophy'or ideological

p%ilosop%ies., in line wit% Mar1 and Engels.s diagnosis o' t%e ideological c%aracter o'

p%ilosop%$ per se 4-sel'&su''icient p%ilosop%$.7 in The Geran Ideology4Alt%usser (55

F2 Mar1 and Engels (5F8 *57! %is inconsistent combination o' t%e idea o' %istorical

materialism as a general t%eor$ o' practices 4deri+ed 'rom Mar1.s si1t% 'ragment o' -=n

3euerbac%.7 wit% a neo&Gantian conception o' p%ilosop%$ as second re'lection on science

4-t%eoretical practices.7 was, b$ and large, representati+e o' an e''ecti+e practice o'

t%eor$ more generall$, deri+ing 'rom certain pri+ileged disciplinar$ ob


5/28

' 3renc% t%inkers %a+e dominated t%eoretical de+elopments in t%e Anglop%one

%umanities since t%e mid (50s, it is primaril$ because o' t%e power'ull$ -post&

p%ilosop%ical. coding o' t%e p%ilosop%ical aspects o' t%eir work ) post&p%ilosop%ical, t%at

is, in a delicatel$ dialectical sense, w%ereb$ e+er$t%ing intellectuall$ producti+e about t%e

European p%ilosop%ical tradition is maintained outside t%e disciplinar$ setting o'

p%ilosop%$! %ere are a number o' conditions o' possibilit$ o' t%is situation, not t%e least

being t%e irrele+ance o' t%e domestic anal$tical p%ilosop%ical tradition to t%e rest o' t%e

%umanities and t%e internal, p%ilosop%ical problematicit$ o' t%e disciplinar$ autonom$ o'

p%ilosop%$ itsel'! ndeed, recognition o' t%is problematic c%aracter 4t%e contradiction

between an in%erited aspiration to absolute uni+ersalit$ and a disciplinar$ particularit$7 is

more or less a condition o' p%ilosop%ical modernit$ itsel'! t t%us comes in a +ariet$ o'

'orms! ?owe+er, because -%eor$. wit% a capital -. was generall$ adopted in a non&

Mar1ist 'orm in t%e Anglo&American reception o' 3renc% t%oug%t in t%e (50s, it tended

to sidestep 4rat%er t%an to speci'$, as was its desired role in Alt%usser.s writings7 t%at

t%oug%t.s comple1 relations%ip to European p%ilosop%$! %is allowed 'or t%e unin%ibited

in+estment o' broad transdisciplinar$ 'ields b$ general&t%eoretical categories, t%e ultimate

status o' w%ic% was unclear8 be it t%e -te1tualit$. o' a general semiotics, t%e -discourses.

o' a 3oucauldian %istoricism, or t%e -topograp%$. o' Lacanian metap$sc%olog$!

As a result, in its Anglo&American guise -t%eor$. became largel$ eit%er pragmatic or

deconstructi+e ) t%at is, eit%er o+er&determined b$ speci'ic 4o'ten political7 uses, or

marked b$ a re'lecti+e distance 'rom t%e metap%$sical claims acknowledged to be

implicit in its concepts ) or bot%! %at is to sa$, -t%eor$. became in a certain sense anti&

t%eoretical, inso'ar as -t%eor$. %ad pre+iousl$ been associated, wit%in p%ilosop%$, wit%


6/28

metap%$sics or doctrine 4#ehre7 more generall$! -%eor$. re


7/28

%is turn to e1plicitl$ p%ilosop%ical re'erences in t%eoretical work across t%e %umanities

4o'ten a turn to t%e citationo' p%ilosop%ical writings as a substitute 'or t%eoretical work7

is broadl$ a turn to w%at Mar1 called -sel'&su''icient p%ilosop%$., p%ilosop%$ in its

classical modern sense! t %as taken two main antagonistic 'orms8 #uasi&Le+inasian and

ot%er post&Derridean 'orms o' -et%ics. ) a con+ergence o' topic wit% t%e post&anal$tical

mainstream o' liberal political p%ilosop%$ ) on t%e one %and 4@utler 200 and 9ritc%le$

2005, 'or e1ample7, and t%e 'ull&blown metap%$sics o' Deleu>e and Alain @adiou, on t%e

ot%er 4=sborne 20057!*%is is t%e ironic endpoint o' t%e main Anglo&"a1on tra


8/28

%e 3rank'urt notion o' critical t%eor$ deri+es 'rom t%e critical turn t%at took place in t%e

sel'&conception o' t%e work o' t%e nstitute 'or "ocial Researc% in 3rank'urt in (*5, in

Ma1 ?ork%eimer.s 'amous essa$ -raditional and 9ritical %eor$. ) an essa$ t%at sets

out 'rom t%e #uestion -C%at is t%eor$/. 4?ork%eimer (527! ?ork%eimer used t%e term

-critical t%eor$. to denote w%at we mig%t call t%e -negati+e. turn in %is conception o'

%istorical materialism as an interdisciplinar$ social t%eor$! %is was t%e conse#uence 'or

%is ?egelian met%odolog$ 4dialecticall$ totali>ing t%e results o' t%e positi+e sciences7 o'

%is inabilit$ to identi'$ a representati+e o' t%e 'uture wit%in t%e present 4as a result o' t%e

degeneration o' communism in t%e "o+iet nion7, 'rom t%e standpoint o' w%ic% t%e

totalit$ mig%t be uni'ied! t in+ol+ed t%e trans'ormation o' -critical acti+it$. itsel' into t%e

-sub


9/28

instrumental reason, w%ic% became t%e basis 'or t%e r&%istorical narrati+e o'+ialectic

of (nlightenent4Dubiel (:6, ?ork%eimer 200, ?ork%eimer and Adorno, 20027!

9riti#ue o' instrumental reason is not -critical t%eor$. in t%e sense o' -t%eor$. in w%ic%

t%e p%rase deri+es its meaning 'rom its opposition to -traditional t%eor$.! Rat%er, it %as

more a''inities wit% t%e Gantian sense o' -criti#ue., w%ic% is precisel$ nott%eor$ as suc%,

alt%oug% %ere it occupies t%e discursi+e space o' t%e t%eoretical, b$ ot%er means8 t%e

literar$&p%ilosop%ical constructi+ism o' t%e Romantic 'ragment, 'or e1ample %ence

+ialectic of (nlightenent.s subtitle,Philosophical &ragents, w%ic% also e+okes

Gierkegaard, o' course! n t%e earl$ (F0s, in reaction against t%is Romantic and at times

almost "c%open%auerian negati+ism, ?ork%eimer.s earl$ (*0s nstitute programme o'

interdisciplinar$ materialism 4t%e pre#uel to 9ritical %eor$7 was re+i+ed b$ t%e $oung

?abermas! t brie'l$ represented a met%odological model 'or o+ercoming t%e percei+ed

impasse o' a p%ilosop%$ conscious onl$ o' its own criti#ue, represented b$ t%e purel$

negati+e restoration o' p%ilosop%$ in Adorno.s work, summed up in %is (FFNegative

+ialectics! ?abermas.s -@etween %ilosop%$ and "cience8 Mar1ism as 9riti#ue. was

publis%ed in (F* ) t%e same $ear as Alt%usser.s -=n t%e Materialist Dialectic.! ' t%ere is

a $ear in w%ic% -t%eor$. in its recent sense was born, (F* was t%at $ear! %is earl$

?abermasian re+i+al o' -Mar1ism as criti#ue. was subse#uentl$ de+eloped into a model

o' criti#ue as -t%e unit$ o' knowledge and interest. in ?abermas.s #uasi&transcendental,

(F:$nowledge and H"an Interests! ?owe+er, it was a %ermeneuticall$ reduced

conception o' ps$c%oanal$sis t%at pro+ided t%e model o' a critical t%eor$ t%ere 4rat%er

t%an t%e criti#ue o' political econom$7, in w%ic% t%e indi+idual sub


10/28

anticipated 4in a di''erent 'orm7 t%e ps$c%oanal$tical reorientation o' political t%inking to

w%ic% part o' t%e Anglop%one +ersion o' t%e 3renc% tradition %as more recentl$

increasingl$ %ad recourse, t%roug% @utler and Ki>ek in particular! -A'ter (F:. and %is

'amous declaration o' t%e -'ascism. o' elements o' ;erman student radicalism, ?abermas

departed 'rom t%e traation

o' American pragmatism into a t%eor$ o' -communicati+e action. 4?abermas ((,

(:5b, ((F7! %e subse#uent generation 4?onnet% ((6, Cellmer ((:7 %a+e remained

wit%in t%e broad parameters demarcating t%is con


11/28

is %ig%l$ partial and, cruciall$, cuts o'' t%e speculati+e aspect o' @ensc%e and ?eidegger, t%at was t%e main ob


12/28

"loterdi


13/28

philosophy1%eor$ cannot be +iabl$ practiced merel$ as sc%olarl$ re'lection upon ) let

alone mere citation o' ) p%ilosop%ical te1ts, w%ic% is t%e 'orm into w%ic% it %as to a great

e1tent deteriorated, in t%e wake o' t%e passage in t%e Englis%&language publis%ing

industr$ 'rom t%e sale o' t%eor$ to t%e sale o' t%eorists a passage corresponding to t%at

'rom readers as producers to readers as consumers!

' -t%eor$ a'ter %eor$. is to be p%ilosop%$, or rat%er, one aspect o' p%ilosop%i>ing 4not

t%e p%ilosop%$ be'ore %eor$, but a p%ilosop%i>ing -a'ter. t%e criti#ues o' sel'&su''icient

p%ilosop%$ and %eor$ alike7, a p%ilosop%i>ing of-%eor$., one mig%t sa$, t%en t%eor$

a'ter %eor$ will be t%e element o' conceptual construction in a transdisciplinar$

p%ilosop%i>ing ) a p%ilosop%i>ing wit%out disciplinarylimits, but precisel$ not, t%ereb$,

wit%out limits, since t%is opens p%ilosop%$ up to t%e test o' e1perience! C%at would a

p%ilosop%icall$ sel'&conscious t%eori>ing o' t%is kind be like/ =ne wa$ to t%ink about

t%is is to re'lect upon t%e de+elopmental d$namic t%at is at stake in t%e issue at %and,

w%en t%e intellectual present is posited as -t%e a'ter. o' some purportedl$ concluded

period, open to a $et&to&be&determined 'uture8 t%e logic o' t%e -post. in its more positi+e,

'orward&looking guise as t%e logic of the new!

Philosophy after Theory: The Pro'le of the New

As a criti#ue o' sel'&su''icient p%ilosop%$ and 4in 3oucault.s case, in particular7 o' t%e

cultural dominance o' t%e %istor$ o' p%ilosop%$ wit%in t%e %istor$ o' ideas, -t%eor$.

posited itsel' as t%e intellectual 'orm o' t%e new8 not merel$ t%e modern o' its da$, but its

+anguard 43'renc% ((67! %e +er$ idea o' -t%eor$ a'ter Ht%eor$I. represents a reprise o'


14/28

t%e now&classical a+ant&garde logic o' temporal negation! C%at t%eor$ a'ter -t%eor$. is to

be will be determined in large part, but b$ no means e1clusi+el$, b$ t%e c%aracter o' t%is

negation! 3urt%ermore, i' suc% t%eor$ ) or better, t%eori>ing ) is to li+e up to t%e structure

o' dialectical appropriation and transcendence implicit in t%e %istorical logic posited b$

%is -a'ter., it will need to incorporate an account o' its own de+elopment, an account o'

t%e new! -%e new. is in man$ wa$s paradigmatic o' a transdisciplinar$ p%ilosop%ical

concept! As a time&determination, t%e new is at once a p%ilosop%ical and a %istorical

concept! t is at work in 4one mig%t sa$ t%at it o+erdetermines7 t%e t%eoretical domains o'

art, culture, economics and politics! Yet it is pre&eminentl$, b$ +irtue o' its uni'ication o'

t%e relations between suc% 'ields, a categor$ o' t%e p%ilosop%$ o' %istor$! ndeed, it is in

'act thecentral categor$ o' t%e p%ilosop%$ o' %istor$ o' modernit$! %e temporalit$ o' t%e

new de'ines modernit$ as an %istorical epoc%! 9ompeting conceptions o' t%e new t%us

bot% ser+e to situate p%ilosop%ies wit%in t%e 'ield o' t%e p%ilosop%$ o' %istor$, and

t%ereb$ indicate di''erent wa$s o' positioning t%at 'ield wit%in broader parameters, suc%

as, 'or e1ample, its relations%ip to nature, or to t%e more basic ontological categories o'

being and becoming!

%us, 'or post&?egelian modernists like @ene, arguabl$, -t%e #uestion o' t%e new takes t%e place o' t%e

#uestion o' %istor$. 4Marrati 200:8 2, emp%asis remo+ed7! %is is a crucial marker o'

t%e ontological monism ) one mig%t call it a kind o' naturalism ) o' Deleu>e.s t%inking

o' time! 3or Deleu>e, -di''erence., -li'e., -e+ent. and -t%e new. ultimatel$ re'er to a


15/28

single, ontologicall$ undi''erentiated process! 9ompeting conceptions o' t%e new t%us

stand at t%e crossroads o' t%e p%ilosop%$ o' %istor$ and t%e p%ilosop%$ o' time, struggling

o+er t%e +er$ possibilit$ o' -%istor$. as a p%ilosop%ical concept! %is ation o' t%e 'uture! 3or in

p%ilosop%ical&political terms, t%ere is a 'uture to t%e e1tent to w%ic% t%ere is #ualitati+e

%istorical no+elt$, not merel$ in t%e sense o' new occurrences or new -e+ents. 4w%ate+er

-e+ents. ma$ turn out to be ) w%ic% is a signi'icant and contested issue %ere7, but in t%e

sense o' c%anges in t%e d$namics o' %istorical temporali>ation t%at e''ect t%e e1istential&

ontological c%aracter o' t%e %uman itsel'! t is 'undamental political c%anges o' t%is kind

t%at t%e concept o' %istor$ is ultimatel$ called upon to t%ink! n Negri.s words, time is t%e

-material 'rom w%ic% communism is constructed. 4Negri 200*8 57, alt%oug% #uite w%at

-time as material. means %ere remains to be e1plicated! At t%is le+el o' abstraction, t%en,

e and Adorno! Eac%

'orges a distincti+el$ post&Romantic p%ilosop%ical 'orm, in part +ia re'lection on

dis


16/28

continuit$ 'orged b$ t%e intergenerational transmission o' aut%oritati+e te1ts, principles

and procedures, and become sel'&consciousl$ retrospecti+e constructions o' continuit$

o+er&determined b$ t%e percei+ed needs o' a p%ilosop%ical present ) t%e products o'

parado1ical -c%oices. o' p%ilosop%ical aut%orit$, willing di''erent p%ilosop%ical 4and

social7 'utures! %at is, -traditions. become genealogical, in a strong Niet>sc%ean&

3oucauldian sense8 subsc%e

((58 (7! t is t%e claim on t%e 'uture %ere t%at distinguis%es t%is Niet>sc%ean

pragmatism 'rom more narrowl$ concei+ed and reducti+el$ -presentist. pragmatisms

4=sborne 200F8 *)78 claims on t%e 'uture re#uire totali>ations o' t%e past! ;enealog$ is

modernist %istoriograp%$!?eidegger, @ene are all prime e1amples o'

polemicall$ genealogical %istorians o' p%ilosop%$, w%o undertook t%e enormous

%ermeneutical labour o' constructing new -traditions. out o' w%ic% to produce t%eir own

work alt%oug% ?eidegger.s %istor$ o' p%ilosop%$, and p%enomenolog$ more generall$

4w%ic% was ?eidegger.s own -p%ilosop%ical modernit$.7, also 'urnis%es t%e e1emplar o'

regression to recei+ed aut%orit$ wit%in p%ilosop%ical modernit$, +ia certain proto&

9at%olic institutional 'orms!

C%en speak o' post&?egelian +ersus anti&?egelian p%ilosop%ical traditions, t%en, re'er

to two %ig%l$ constructed competing p%ilosop%ical lineages 4pro+isionall$, we mig%t sa$,

dialectical and anti&dialectical7, w%ic%, in t%e 'orm currentl$ recei+ed in t%e Anglop%one


17/28

literature, were largel$ t%e retrospecti+e -in+ention. o' t%e 3renc% p%ilosop%ical

imaginar$ o' t%e (F0s ) produced in t%e lig%t o' p%ilosop%$ in Europe since t%e (20s,

wit% t%eir antipat%ies pro


18/28

%is genealogical sub


19/28

t%e new, and its attendant negations, 'rom t%e standpoint o' particular politicall$ de'ined

'utures! n t%is respect, in t%e mo+e 'rom -%eor$. to t%e t%eoretical practices t%at

currentl$ dominate an increasingl$ transnational Englis%&language market in %umanities,

we see a dual retreat, 'irst, 'rom -t%eor$. as a+ant&garde to a general modernism o' t%eor$

4an emp%asis on t%e present as a negation o' t%e past7 and second, 'rom a modernism o'

t%eor$, to t%e illusor$ present o' t%e space o' -t%e contemporar$.! Muc% o' w%at passes

'or t%eor$ toda$, especiall$ in t%e degraded 'orm o' t%e circulation o' -marketable

names., aspires to be contemporar$ ) to ing, is simple8-?ow to t%ink t%e -newness. o' t%e new/.

%at is, %ow to t%ink t%e new.s transcendence o' its conditions, as -no+elt$., wit%out

reducing it to eit%er 47 a relation o' negation to t%ose conditions 4i!e! a 'orm o'

dependence7, or 427 t%e pure transcendence o' a #uasi&t%eological -creation./ n ot%er

words, w%erein lies t%e immanent, rat%er t%an purel$ relational, intelligibilit$ o' t%e


20/28

newness o' t%e new/ art o' t%e answer clearl$ lies in -a''irmation.8 t%e new is an

affirative ode of negation, ot%erwise called 4b$ Niet>sc%e, ?eidegger, @ene alike7 -destruction.! %is is a crucial part o' t%e a''irmation o' t%e new, but onl$

a part, 'or w%ile destruction clears t%e space 'or t%e new, t%e positi+it$ o' its speci'ic

newness still needs to be accounted 'or! ?ow t%en, precisel$, does t%e a''irmation o' t%e

new stand in relation to its negation o' t%e old/ %is is t%e temporal&ontological problem

t%at no re'lection on t%e 'uture o' t%eor$ itsel' can a+oid! 9onceptuall$, it re#uires a

renewed in+estigation o' t%e underl$ing a''inities between ?egel.s and Niet>sc%e.s

t%oug%t, at t%eir deepest le+els, at t%e +er$ moment at w%ic% t%e$ appear most opposed5

in its %istorical dimension, it re#uires p%ilosop%i>ing about, and out o', non&p%ilosop%ical

e1perience! t is %ere t%at @ene.s writing distances itsel' 'rom t%e

classicall$ metap%$sical problematic t%at it ot%erwise appears to s%are wit% @adiou, and

to w%ic% @adiou would %a+e us reduce Deleu>e.s t%oug%t 4@adiou 20007!

n 3hat is Philosophy4, it is argued t%at8 -%e %istor$ o' p%ilosop%$ means t%at we

e+aluate not onl$ t%e %istorical no+elt$ o' t%e concepts created b$ a p%ilosop%er but also

t%e power o' t%eir becoming w%en t%e$ pass into one anot%er. 4Deleu>e and ;uattari

((8 *2!7 %e e1ample gi+en t%ere is t%e con


21/28

negation, a''irmation and t%e new! =r to put it anot%er wa$8 per%aps t%e new mig%t be

made to wor% onand transfort%e concepts o' negation and a''irmation, 'rom its

ambiguous location somew%ere between t%e ontological and socio&%istorical -realms.!

"uc% a position re'uses an$ straig%t'orwardl$ resol+ed sense o' t%e %istoricall$

ontological, not least because o' its radicali>ation o' t%e problem o' t%e 'uture, w%ic%

problemati>es e+en retroacti+e ontologi>ations o' t%e %istorical! t categoricall$ re'uses

t%e internalit$ to a con+entionall$ constructed p%ilosop%ical 'ield c%aracteristic o' t%e

Gantian series cited in 3hat is Philosophy4, a''irming instead t%e openness o' a

p%ilosop%icall$ in'ormed t%eoretical discourse to t%e present as a w%ole! %is is a

tra


22/28

Alt%usser, L! 4(557 -Remarks on t%e erminolog$ Adopted. ) (F6 re'ace to t%e (F*

essa$ -=n t%e Materialist Dialectic8 =n t%e ne+enness o' =rigins., in&or -ar),

trans! @! @rewster, London8 New Le't @ooks! F2!

@adiou, A! 420007+ele"2e: The *lao"r of 5eing, trans! L! @urc%ill, Minneapolis, MN8

Minnesota ni+ersit$ ress!

@ene, ;! and ;uattari, 3! 4(:*7Anti0edip"s: *apitalis and Schi2ophrenia, trans!

R! ?urle$, M! "eem and ?! Lane, Minneapolis8 Minnesota ni+ersit$ ress!

&&&! 4(:57A Tho"sand Platea"s: *apitalis and Schi2ophrenia, trans! @! Massumi,

Minneapolis8 Minnesota ni+ersit$ ress!


23/28

&&&! 4((7 3hat is Philosophy4, trans! ;! @urc%ell and ?! omlinson, London and New

York8 Oerso!

Derrida, J! 4((27 -3orce o' Law8 %e HM$stical 3oundations o' Aut%orit$I., in D!

9ornell, M! Rosen'eld and D!;! 9arlson 4eds7,+econstr"ction and the Possi'ility

of B"stice, London and New York8 Routledge! *)F5!

Dollimore, J! 420007 -Cis%'ul %eor$ and "e1ual olitics.,/adical Philosophy0*8 :&

2!

Dosse, 3! and ;lassman, D! 4((57History of Str"ct"ralis1 6ol"e 9: The /ising Sign8

97C=9DD, Minneapolis, MN8 ni+ersit$ o' Minnesota ress!

0001 4((57History of Str"ct"ralis8 6ol"e E: The Sign Sets8 9DF0Present,

Minneapolis, MN8 ni+ersit$ o' Minnesota ress!

Dubiel, ?! 4(:67 Theory and Politics: St"dies in the +evelopent of *ritical Theory,

trans! @! ;regg, 9ambridge, MA and London!

3euerbac%, L! 4(527 -owards a 9riti#ue o' ?egel.s %ilosop%$., in The &iery 5roo%:

Selected 3ritings of #"dwig &e"er'ach, ed! and trans! K! ?an'i, New York8

Anc%or @ooks! 6*&(F!

3'renc%, ! 4((67 The Tie of Theory: A History of Tel !"el 9D>09


24/28

&&&! 4(:5a7 The Philosophical +isco"rse of -odernity: Twelve #ect"res, trans! 3!

Lawrence, 9ambridge, MA8 M ress!

&&&! 4(:5b7 The Theory of *o"nicative Action8 6ol"e E: The *riti."e of

&"nctionalist /eason 4(:7, trans! ! Mc9art%$, 9ambridge8 olit$ ress!

&&&! 4((7 The Theory of *o"nicative Action8 6ol"e 9: /eason and the

/ationali2ation of Society 4(:7,trans! ! Mc9art%$, 9ambridge8 olit$ ress!

&&&! 4((F75etween &acts and Nors: *ontri'"tions to a +isco"rse Theory of #aw

and +eocracy, trans! C! Re%g, 9ambridge, MA8 M ress!

?egel, ;!C!3! 4(557Phenoenology of Spirit, trans! A!O! Miller, =1'ord8 =1'ord

ni+ersit$ ress!

?eidegger, M! 4((07$ant and the Pro'le of -etaphysics, trans! R! a't,

@loomington, N8 ndiana ni+ersit$ ress!

?onnet%, A! 4((67 The Str"ggle for /ecognition: The -oral Graar of Social

*onflicts, trans! J! Anderson, 9ambridge8 olit$ ress!

?ork%eimer, M! 4(527! -raditional and 9ritical %eor$., in *ritical Theory:Selected

(ssays, 9ontinuum! ::)262!

&&&! 42007(clipse of /eason, London and New York8 9ontinuum!

?ork%eimer, M! and Adorno, ! C! 420027+ialectic of (nlightenent:Philosophical

&ragents, trans! E! Jep%cott, "tan'ord8 "tan'ord ni+ersit$ ress!

Gosik, G! 4(5F7+ialectics of the *oncrete: A St"dy of Pro'les on -an and 3orld,

trans! G! Go+anda and J! "c%midt, Dordrec%t and @oston8 Reidel ublis%ing

9ompan$!

Lecourt, D! 4(567-ar)is and (pisteology: 5achelard8 *ang"ilhe and &o"ca"lt8

London8 New Le't @ooks!


25/28

Marrati, ! 4200:7 -Li'e and E+ent8 Deleu>e on Newness., in J!J! @ono, ! Dean and E!!

Kiarek, eds,A Tie for the H"anities: &"t"rity and the #iits of A"tonoy,

New York8 3ord%am ni+ersit$ ress! 5&2:!

Mar1, G! and Engels, 3! 4(5F7 -%e ;erman deolog$. in *ollected 3or%s, 6ol"e C8

9sc%e, 3! 4((57 -=n t%e ses and Disad+antages o' ?istor$ 'or Li'e., in @ntiely

-editations, trans! R!J! ?ollingdale,9ambridge8 9ambridge ni+ersit$ ress! 65&

2*!

=sborne, ! 420007 -%ilosop%$ in 9ultural %eor$., inPhilosophy in *"lt"ral Theory,

London and New York8 Routledge! &(!

&&&! 4200F7 -HC%oe+er "peaks o' 9ulture "peaks o' Administration as CellI8 Disputing

ragmatism in 9ultural "tudies., *"lt"ral St"diesF0 478 **&5!

&&&! 420057 -Neo&9lassic8 Alain @adiou.s5eing and (vent.,/adical Philosophy28 (&

2(!

&&&! 4200a7 -A "udden opicalit$8 Mar1, Niet>sc%e and t%e olitics o' 9risis.,/adical

PhilosophyF08 ()2F!

&&&! 4200b7 -Modernism and %ilosop%$., in ! @rooker et al 4eds7, The )ford

Hand'oo% of -oderniss, =1'ord8 =1'ord ni+ersit$ ress, pp! *::)0(!

&&& 3ort%coming! -%e 3iction o' t%e 9ontemporar$.!

"loterdi


26/28

RanciPre, J! 4((67 n the Shores of Politics, trans! L! ?eron, London and New York8

Oerso!

Ricoeur, ! 42007-eory8 History8 &orgetting, trans! G! @lame$ and D! ellauer,

9%icago, L8 9%icago ni+ersit$ ress!

"c%mitt, A! 4(:*7History and Str"ct"re: An (ssay on Hegelian0-ar)ist and

Str"ct"ralist Theories of History, trans! J! ?er', 9ambridge, MA8 M ress!

Ceber, "! 4200:75en,ains =a'ilities, 9ambridge, MA and London8 ?ar+ard

ni+ersit$ ress!

Cellmer, A! 4((:7(ndgaes: The Irreconcila'le Nat"re of -odernity, trans! D!

Midgle$, 9ambridge, MA and London8 M ress!

Ciggers%aus, R! 4((7 The &ran%f"rt School: Its History8 Theories and Politics,

9ambridge8 olit$ ress!

Qiek, "! 4(((7 The Tic%lish S"',ect: The A'sent *entre of Political ntology, London

and New York, Oerso!

&&&! 42007 rgans 3itho"t 5odies n +ele"2e and *onse."ences, New York and

London8 Routledge!

N=E"


27/28

As part o' t%is market, -3renc% t%eor$. is e+en being sold back to 3rance, in an ironic -moderni>ing.

importation o' sel' as ot%er 4Ali>art et al 2006, 200F, 20057! A p%ilosop%er in 3rance must now

circulate t%roug% Englis%&language academic networks in order to become a -3renc% p%ilosop%er., e+en

in non&Englis%&speaking >ones, suc% as "out% America and "out%&East Asia!2"ee Dosse and ;lassman ((5!

*%e reception o' t%ese t%inkers is too per+asi+e to merit singling out an$ particular te1ts! t is wort%

noting, %owe+er, t%at t%is pro+ides t%e conte1t 'or t%e promotion o' Ki>ek.s work +ia t%e manner in

w%ic% %e %as inserted into it %is own brand o' ?egelian Lacanianism, in t%e polemical 'orm o' a new

-9artesianism. 4Ki>ek ((( and 2007! Ki>ek alternates tacticall$ across t%e t%eor$p%ilosop%$ di+ide8

pla$ing -p%ilosop%$. 4?egel7 against -t%eor$., and -t%eor$. 4Lacan7 against -p%ilosop%$.! %is constant

tactical manoeu+ring, c%aracteristic o' %is writings, places t%em per'ormati+el$ wit%in t%e more narrowl$

pragmatic band o' t%e pragmatist mainstream!

Cit% regard to Deleu>e, it is important to distinguis% %is more classicall$ p%ilosop%ical work 4be it

interpretati+e or constructi+e7, 'rom t%e more complicated, e1perimental status o' %is two main books

wit% 3Bli1 ;uattari 4Deleu>e and ;uattari (:* and (:57 ) 'or w%ic%, see below! ?owe+er, t%e

nominall$ co&aut%ored 3hat is Philosophy44Deleu>e and ;uattari ((7 reinstates t%e classicall$

modern disciplinar$ di+isions between -p%ilosop%$., -art. and -science.!

%e t%eoretical side o' 'eminism 4-3renc% 'eminism. as a part o' -3renc% t%eor$.7 presents a more

complicated tra


28/28

%e partial e1ception to t%is rule is Jac#ues RanciPre, w%o remains in man$ wa$s a politici>ed post&

3oucauldian %istorian o' -s$stems o' t%oug%t.! ?owe+er, t%e Englis%&language reception o' %is work

%as to a large e1tent 'ocused on %is -aest%etics., in strict distinction 'rom t%e successor discipline o' -art

t%eor$.! As suc% it represents somet%ing o' a mediated return to t%e classical modern p%ilosop%ical'ield! ?is political t%oug%t similarl$ draws %ea+il$ on classical p%ilosop%ical sources 4RanciPre ((67,

but it distinguis%es itsel' 'rom t%em, nonet%eless, b$ deplo$ing t%em in t%e conte1t o' a t%eor$ o'

sub

peter osborne - philosophy after theory - transdisciplinarity and the new

Documents