Michael Weinstein | Purdue University (original) (raw)
Uploads
Books by Michael Weinstein
Papers by Michael Weinstein
Journal of Politics, 1986
International Journal of Comparative Sociology - INT J COMP SOCIOL, 1977
History of European Ideas, 1993
Extends Simmel's reflections on modern individualism into late- modern and post-modern periods.
At the end of his writing, &dquo;La Diff6rance,&dquo; Jacques Derridal deconstructs his text by t... more At the end of his writing, &dquo;La Diff6rance,&dquo; Jacques Derridal deconstructs his text by taking on an authoritative rhetorical tone. Reflecting back on his discussion of metaphysics, Derrida announces that 6 '(t)hcre will be no unique name, even if it were the name of Being&dquo; .2 And then he takes a surprising phenomenological turn and advocates a privileged attitude or disposition towards his reflection: * The authors here use the Derridian &dquo;deletion&dquo; which &dquo;allows what has been cancelled to be read&dquo;, suggesting without question the possible &dquo;deconstruction&dquo; of their own text. (Editor's note).
The topic of how society, defined in its most general sense as a complex of intermental relations... more The topic of how society, defined in its most general sense as a complex of intermental relations, is constituted by the participants in it has been of primary concern to contributers to the traditions of classical sociology and, more broadly, those of modern social philosophy. The sociological theorists of the late-nineteenth and early-twentieth centuries inquired into the possibility of society, by which is meant the presuppositions of intermental community, whereas the social philosophers of that era and of later decades investigated the question of how individual selves know one another to be minded beings. One of the primary aims of the social theories that were allied with the emergence of sociology in the second half of the nineteenth century was to critique the modern doctrine, which was inherited from Cartesian philosophy, that the individual thinking ego could only know directly its own mental activity and the non-mental objects of that activity. It was thought that in order to establish society as a complex of intermental relations it was necessary to show how individuated minds could have immediate access to one another. The search for the ways in which the mentality of other selves is disclosed to the thinking individual led to a florescence of phenomenological insight into the varieties of the social bonds. For the most part interest was and has continued to be directed at the constitution of society through symbolic communication in the form of ordinary language. However, a few thinkers also attempted to show that relations among minded beings are constituted non-verbally and immediately, primarily through the sense of sight. The following discussion will describe and relate two alternative and contrasting accounts of the constitution of intermental relations through vision, that of Georg Simmel and that of Jean-Paul Sartre. The aim of the commentary will be to show how, when they are taken together, Simmel's and Sartre's accounts reveal the general nature of the social relation as an uneasy compound of subjectivising and objectivising elements or tendencies.
Journal of Politics, 1986
International Journal of Comparative Sociology - INT J COMP SOCIOL, 1977
History of European Ideas, 1993
Extends Simmel's reflections on modern individualism into late- modern and post-modern periods.
At the end of his writing, &dquo;La Diff6rance,&dquo; Jacques Derridal deconstructs his text by t... more At the end of his writing, &dquo;La Diff6rance,&dquo; Jacques Derridal deconstructs his text by taking on an authoritative rhetorical tone. Reflecting back on his discussion of metaphysics, Derrida announces that 6 '(t)hcre will be no unique name, even if it were the name of Being&dquo; .2 And then he takes a surprising phenomenological turn and advocates a privileged attitude or disposition towards his reflection: * The authors here use the Derridian &dquo;deletion&dquo; which &dquo;allows what has been cancelled to be read&dquo;, suggesting without question the possible &dquo;deconstruction&dquo; of their own text. (Editor's note).
The topic of how society, defined in its most general sense as a complex of intermental relations... more The topic of how society, defined in its most general sense as a complex of intermental relations, is constituted by the participants in it has been of primary concern to contributers to the traditions of classical sociology and, more broadly, those of modern social philosophy. The sociological theorists of the late-nineteenth and early-twentieth centuries inquired into the possibility of society, by which is meant the presuppositions of intermental community, whereas the social philosophers of that era and of later decades investigated the question of how individual selves know one another to be minded beings. One of the primary aims of the social theories that were allied with the emergence of sociology in the second half of the nineteenth century was to critique the modern doctrine, which was inherited from Cartesian philosophy, that the individual thinking ego could only know directly its own mental activity and the non-mental objects of that activity. It was thought that in order to establish society as a complex of intermental relations it was necessary to show how individuated minds could have immediate access to one another. The search for the ways in which the mentality of other selves is disclosed to the thinking individual led to a florescence of phenomenological insight into the varieties of the social bonds. For the most part interest was and has continued to be directed at the constitution of society through symbolic communication in the form of ordinary language. However, a few thinkers also attempted to show that relations among minded beings are constituted non-verbally and immediately, primarily through the sense of sight. The following discussion will describe and relate two alternative and contrasting accounts of the constitution of intermental relations through vision, that of Georg Simmel and that of Jean-Paul Sartre. The aim of the commentary will be to show how, when they are taken together, Simmel's and Sartre's accounts reveal the general nature of the social relation as an uneasy compound of subjectivising and objectivising elements or tendencies.
