Abstract
From the perspective of quite different theoretical traditions, Simone Weil and Hannah Arendt present nearly identical and equally powerful critiques of technological determinism in modernity. Yet unlike Arendt, Weil develops a concept of work that draws a distinction between technology and instrumental action as “methodical thinking.” As a result, Weil's theory of action embraces something that Arendt's theatrical politics rejects—a concept of liberatory instrumentality, or purposeful performance. I shall reassess some of the inadequacies of Arendt's concept of work and develop Simone Weil's concept of methodical thinking in order to argue for a more neighborly affinity between work:interaction and purposeful:theatrical performance than Arendtian public realm theory, for all its power, currently allows. If such an affinity is possible, then public realm theory might be more adequately equipped to deliver on what I take to be its promise as an emancipatory project in late modernity.
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Subject
Political Science and International Relations,Sociology and Political Science
Cited by
21 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献
1. On Hannah Arendt’s Aestheticism;Res Philosophica;2024
2. MEDIA REPRESENTATIONS OF UKRAINE AND UKRAINIANS: A CORPUS-BASED ANALYSIS OF AMERICAN AND BRITISH MEDIA SOURCES;Scientific Journal of National Pedagogical Dragomanov University. Series 9. Current Trends in Language Development;2023-06-30
3. Thorstein Veblen, Bard of Democracy;European Journal of Pragmatism and American Philosophy;2021-04-02
4. Beneath the tip of the iceberg: Havel on small‐scale work and “Dissent”;Constellations;2021-02-16
5. Unpredictable yet Guided: Arendt on Principled Action;Journal of the British Society for Phenomenology;2018-10-31