The structuralist thought, which was at its heyday in the mid-1960s, soon became a target of criticism. However, as the article argues, at its inception, structuralism was intended more as a method rather than an all-encompassing mode of thinking. The original inspiration for structuralism came from Russian and Saussurean linguistics and, later, it was explored by Lévi-Strauss as a suitable method for anthropology and related disciplines. In this application, the emphasis is less on the structure conceived as a system of differences and more on its transformative character. Furthermore, not only the internal, but also the external relations of system are highlighted, which implies the use of comparative methods in anthropology. The possibility of studying cultural practices and symbols is enhanced when their similarities and differences are considered in terms of structures and sign-systems. The structuralist thought that denies individual agency thus appears to be a paradoxical misunderstanding of the original purpose of structuralism as a method; a science of cultural facts in their variability remains a contemporary project. and Patrice Maniglier.
According to the traditional interpretation, Lévi-Strauss’ structural anthropology deposes the concept of man and the notion of human nature from its central place in human and social sciences. While it’s necessary to acknowledge Lévi-Strauss’ distance vis-à-vis all philosophy based on intentionality, experience and consciousness of subject, we argue that the most interesting purpose of the structural anthropology lies elsewhere. Not only Lévi-Strauss never declared himself being part of anti-humanism movement, but most of all, his famous polemics with Sartre at the end of La Pensée sauvage should be interpreted as part of his fight against ethnocentrism. The project of “dissolving the man” can be thus read as deconstructing the idea that western man makes of himself in the light of ethnological findings about universal structures orchestrating all human societies. We further show that the notion of subject survived its very death announced by the most radical structuralist thinkers and that structural method could be effectively employed in order to study different techniques and modes of subjectivation, revealing that “becoming subject” is a process structured by our language, symbolic universe and ethical teleology. and Ondřej Švec.
Článek se dělí na dvě části. V první se autor zabývá teoriemi subjektu Alaina Badioua a Slavoje Žižka, které lze považovat za teorie překračující horizont postmoderní situace. Alain Badiou spojuje teorii subjektu se svou matematizovanou ontologií, která mu dává možnost chápat subjekt jako prvek nezačlenitelný do „situace“ (daného způsobu prezentace „mnohostí“). Subjekt je procedura pravdy, která se zakládá na věrnosti pravdě-události. Slavoj Žižek, vycházející z Jacquesa Lacana, formuluje teorii subjektu opřenou o ontologii, jež vykazuje některé podobnosti s ontologií Badiouovou. Působí v ní Reálno, které vytváří mezery a prázdná místa v daném symbolickém řádu. Subjekt vzniká vstupem do Reálna, který je spojen s překřížením fantasmatu (traversé du fantasme), jež subjekt zbavuje jeho substance (identity, ustálené organizace vědomí a sebeprožívání), a subjekt pak vystupuje jako prázdno. Autor se pak pokouší pojmenovat, čím tyto teorie prolamují postmoderní situaci, a zároveň se snaží postihnout jejich problematické rysy. V druhé části článku autor rozvíjí teorii subjektu, která vychází z tohoto prolomení postmoderní situace, ale snaží se tyto problematické rysy překonat. Autor využívá Althusserovu koncepci symptomálního čtení a latentního obsahu. Ty propojuje s Lacanovým a Žižkovým pojmem symbolického řádu a latentní obsah dosazuje na místo Reálna. To mu umožňuje pojmout symbolický řád z hlediska jeho dynamiky a změn (historizace symbolického řádu). Při rozvíjení teorie subjektu se opírá o Bachelardovo pojetí vědeckého subjektu jako procesu očišťování od představ vznikajících v přirozeném světě. Tímto způsobem dospívá k pojmu subjekt-idea, který pak klade vedle subjektu spjatého s fyzickým bytím a subjektu poznání. Subjekt poznání se ustavuje jako trojí pohyb: jako pohyb ve vztahu k subjektu spjatému s fyzickým bytím, jako pohyb ve vztahu k subjektu-ideji a jako pohyb ve vztahu k latentnímu obsahu symbolického řádu. V závěru článku pak autor na základě Hegelova výkladu daimonion ukazuje, že archetypem subjektu poznání je Sókratés., The article has two parts. In the first, the author is concerned with the theories of the subject in the work of Alain Badiou and Slavoj Žižek which can be understood as theories that go beyond the horizon of the post-modern situation. Alain Badiou links his theory of the subject to his mathematised ontology which opens up the possibility of understanding the subject as an element that cannot be incorporated into a “situation” (of a given mode of presentation of “plurality”). The subject is a procedure of truth which is founded on fidelity to the truth-event. Slavoj Žižek, taking his lead from Jacques Lacan, formulates a theory of the subject grounded in an ontology which shows some similarities with the ontology of Badiou. The Real is active in this theory, creating gaps and empty spaces in the given symbolic order. The subject originates from an entry into the Real stemming from the crossing of the phantasm (traversé du fantasme), the subject of which divests itself of its substance (identity, enduring organisation of consciousness and self-experiencing) and emerges as a void. The author then attempts to pinpoint how these theories break out of the post-modern situation and also points to their problematic features. In the second part of the article a theory of the subject is developed which is informed by a breaking-free from the post-modern situation, but which attempts to overcome these problematic features. The author exploits Althusser’s conception of a symptomatic reading and a latent content. He connects these with Lacan’s and Žižek’s concept of a symbolic order and instead of the Real he substitutes latent content. This enables him to conceive the symbolic order from the point of view of dynamics and change. In this development of the theory of the subject support is found in Bachelard’s conception of the scientific subject as a process of purging the images that arise in the natural world. In this way we arrive at the concept of the subject-idea, which then posits, in addition to the subject bound up with physical being, a subject of knowledge. The subject of knowledge establishes itself as a threefold movement: as a movement in relation to the subject bound up with physical being; as a movement in relation to the subject-idea; and as a movement in relation to the latent content of the symbolic order. In conclusion it is shown, on the basis of Hegel’s interpretation of the daimonion, that the archetype of the subject of knowledge is Socrates., and Michael Hauser.
Kapitola z knihy The Psychic Life of Power (1997) nabízí originální četbu pojetí ideologie a ideologické interpelace, jak je předkládá Louis Athusser, jeden z nejvýznamnějších marxistických myslitelů 20. století. Judith Butlerová analyzuje zejména fenomén subjektivace, který v souvislosti s ideologickou interpelací vstupuje do hry, a afektivní pouto, které je konstitutivní podmínkou fungování interpelace. Druhá část textu je věnována polemice s Mladenem Dolarem, představitelem lublaňské psychoanalytické školy, který ve své četbě Althussera propojuje problematiku ideologie a lacanovské psychoanalýzy – tato polemika se týká především pojmu reálna, který Dolar transponuje z psychoanalytického do marxistického kontextu., A chapter in the book The Psychic Life of Power (1997) offers an original reading of the conception of ideology and ideological inquiry as it is presented by Louis Althusser, one of the most important Marxist thinkers of the twentieth century. Judith Butler’s analysis focuses on the phenomenon of subjectivisation which, in the context of ideological inquiry, enters our consideration, and on the affective bond which is a constitutive condition of the fuctioning of inquiry. The second half of the text is devoted to a polemical discussion with Mladen Dolar, representative of the Lubliana psychoanalytical school which, in its reading of Althusser, brings with it the problematic of ideology and Lacanian psychoanalysis – these polemics concern above all the concept of the real which Dolar transposes from the psychoanalytical context to the Marxist one., Judith Butler, Josef Fulka., and přeloženo z anglického jazyka
The starting point for the research project pointed out in this article is the assumption that not only ideas, religion and ideologies but also technical connoted consumer goods could be characterized by socio-cultural qualities. The term “socio-cultural” implies cultural potential in the understanding of contextualization in a world of meaning on the one hand and the social potential of integration in posttraditional communities, i. e. small lifeworlds on the other hand. The article argues from a sociological perspective (highly influenced by Erving Goffman’s dramatological approach) viewing not firstly from the society point of view but consequently from that an individual, characterized by natural artificiality (Helmuth Plessner). and Michaela Pfadenhauer.
Nostalgia is a characteristic of our time, and it extends more and more also to technology. Rapid technological change is as well a cause of modernisation and related social developments as a cause of reluctance to new technologies and nostalgic longing for the past. Good examples for this phenomenon are media technologies. As media are part of the world of our everyday life they are also object of personal memories. Changing and developing in the flux of time, they are no more what they used to be in a former stage of our life. Therefore they form part of an expanding culture of memory, with aspects of musealization and nostalgia. This nostalgia of the media does not only extend to the material remains (media archives, personal collections etc.) but also to their specific way of appearance and representation, the way they let us see the world generated by them. Media do increasingly devote themselves to this nostalgia of the media, which means that they rely to different historic versions of themselves or of other media. Therefore nostalgia of the media in the media is a way of self-reference of the media, because media refer to themselves as subject to historic development, remembrance, oblivion, destruction etc. But nevertheless a nostalgic attitude towards media technologies, as in the case of other technologies as well, does not exclude openness for new technological developments, but may also very well coexist with the latter. and Andreas Böhn.
Zpráva z koference / Conference report: Tělesnost a autonomie: bioetika v občanské společnosti Workshop Filosofického ústavu AV ČR, Praha, 9. prosince 2011. and Jana Dlouhá.