Nigel Cones | University of Calgary (original) (raw)

Uploads

Drafts by Nigel Cones

This paper will argue that a specific and coherent argument about power and empire can be drawn o... more This paper will argue that a specific and coherent argument about power and empire can be drawn out of Thucydides’ History of the Peloponnesian War. Through the use of dramatic juxtaposition in the narrative and through common themes in several speeches, the History illustrates that bearing and exercising power produces a kind of character and logic that limits itself. The character of the powerful will tend to limit itself by virtue of ignoring the existential insecurity caused by fortune in human affairs as well as the ‘reverse law of the stronger,’ meaning that imperial subjects will have a natural tendency to rebel against that imperial power. Methodological issues about whether coherent arguments can be drawn from the History and about the intentions of Thucydides himself in shaping his narrative will be discussed, as will several possible counter-arguments. These latter possible refutations include the issue of agency against the structuralist implications of this power thesis in Thucydides and the counter-case that Sparta provides - an empire that explicitly does not arrogantly ignore fortune and act aggressively as a result. The final implications are that, if a coherent thesis about power can be drawn out of the History, and regardless of the intentions of Thucydides in possibly placing that argument in his text, can a thesis about the constitutive and self-limiting effects of power be applied beyond the world of the Peloponnesian war and, if so, what does this mean for the powerful in the contemporary world?

This paper will offer a critique of Richard Rorty’s attempt at combining a postmetaphysical philo... more This paper will offer a critique of Richard Rorty’s attempt at combining a postmetaphysical philosophy and a liberal politics. My criticism of Rorty can come down to one fairly simple point: an anti-foundationalist, postmodern philosophy like Rorty’s cannot coherently rely on metaphysical foundations. What foundations Rorty relies on, including cruelty and liberalism, human nature, and the public/private divide, as well as the ensuing implications for politics of an anti-foundationalist ethos will all be explored. This will help draw out ideas on the role of philosophical foundations in politics and on what is gained or lost when not expressing ideas in metaphysical and universal terms. A postmodernism that is both sceptical of universal foundations or of truths which correspond to an external reality and that wants to be politically engaged must come to terms with the possibility of a politics without foundations, and whether activity can even be called political if it lacks philosophy. This critique of Rorty, then, is a proxy for a debate about the possibility of a coherent postmodern politics.

The most famous parts of Thucydides’ History of the Peloponnesian War are discursive acts: Pericl... more The most famous parts of Thucydides’ History of the Peloponnesian War are discursive acts: Pericles’ Funeral Oration, the Melian Dialogue, or the Mytilenian Debate. This narrative structure opens Thucydides up for an analysis based around the methodological tools of constructivism, focused on norms and discourse and the speech acts that constitute them. Drawing on the critiques of Barkin’s realist constructivism and using R.B.J. Walker and Cynthia Weber as two exemplary postmodern IR theorists, I will argue that the most fitting analytical frame for reading the History is one that roots realist constructivism in an enduring Foucauldian model of power: constitutive, diffuse, and discursive. Instead of using the modern sovereign state and modern IR theory as objects, I want to see if this specifically postmodern analysis can draw out intriguing conclusions about the Greek polity, the normative interaction of these polities, and their constitution as spatio-temporal objects through speech acts. More work needs to be done expanding on existing literature by moving beyond a constructivism focused just on norms, identity, and institutions, to a postmodern constructivism that can look at the constitution of spatio-temporal political units and territory and on how those discourses are defined and shaped by power relations.

All individuals face the paradox of freedom: they struggle with whether their actions are freely ... more All individuals face the paradox of freedom: they struggle with whether their actions are freely chosen or externally imposed. This thesis explores whether any solution to the paradox of freedom can be found: can our choices be our own, given the constraints of political community in which our choices are always embedded. Can individual autonomy be theoretically and practically saved?

The new model of autonomy I propose returns to the tradition of autonomy as self-constitution. The chief presumptions of self-constitution are that our free individuality is not pre-given but rather is contingent, and developed through working on one’s self with reflective practices like meditation. I analyze four contributors to a new theory of self-constitution: Kant, Hegel, Nietzsche, and Foucault. I intend to improve on their accounts by offering a theory of pluralistic care of the autonomous self. This theory refocuses self-constitution on the formation of the internal moral states that create the conditions for autonomy. Though drawing on Foucault, my own theory extracts from his historical descriptions to build a model of freedom where the practices on the self which create autonomous individuality are available to all.

My project’s aim is to find a way through the paradox of freedom and reinvigorate liberal thought, through recognizing the reality of external institutional configurations in shaping individual subjectivity, and how autonomy must first emerge internally in the act of self-constitution for that subjective individual will to act freely.

Conference Presentations by Nigel Cones

The study of politics deals partially with the study of humans acting and behaving, and Internati... more The study of politics deals partially with the study of humans acting and behaving, and International Relations theories are strengthened by having a superior understanding of human nature and evolutionary theory, and thus human political behavior. One means to this end is to compare a sociobiological model of human nature, defined by E.O. Wilson as “the scientific study of the biological basis of all forms of social behavior,” to the current models of human nature implicit within or assumed by the major theoretical traditions of IR. My contention is that though there are accurate elements in each of the these theories, there are crucial inaccuracies as well, and a proper model of human nature from which to base further theoretical work takes elements from each theory to build a well-rounded model of a “bipolar ape” as an acting model of human behavior in international affairs. After developing a biopolitical framework as a lens through which to analyze politics, where political behavior is seen as an evolutionarily adaptive social behavior, and that is heavily influenced by the ideas of evolutionary psychology and the modular theory of the brain, this paper will proceed to contrast and compare this model of human nature to the similar claims or assumptions that permeate IR theory.

For the sake of simplicity, the broad field of IR theories can be broken down into three major theoretical traditions: Classical and Structural Realism, Liberalism and Idealism, and Marxism and Constructivism. This divide is partially based around a rough split in their views on human nature: pessimistic, optimistic, and malleable and formed through socialization. The crucial point is that each theoretical tradition is rooted in a specific assumption about human nature, and the conclusions and policy prescriptions that unwind from these assumptions in each branch of the theoretical tree are based on this specific human nature claim. Any attempts to explore and understand a knowable, investigable world of human behavior based on any extremely malleable model of human nature is no longer sustainable in light of the sociobiological and neurobiological revolutions of the last few decades. A model of human nature that is based on the prevailing evolutionary consensus is a necessary component of a larger theory if that theory wants to explain and predict human behavior.

In this project I examine libertarian themes in the work of Michel Foucault and the implications ... more In this project I examine libertarian themes in the work of Michel Foucault and the implications for contemporary libertarian political theory. Libertarian or classical liberal goals of opposition to power and support for individual freedom are intriguingly articulated in his 1975-1976 lectures, “Society Must be Defended” (SMBD). SMBD acts as a kind of exemplary case to draw out this libertarian thematic, and as a point of departure for launching libertarianism beyond the liberal subject.

Foucault is difficult to situate because of the individualistic themes in his critiques of power and ethics of the care of the self. While Foucault’s analysis of power in SMBD partially takes the liberal models of the rights-bearing subject and social contract as its foil, a kind of raw libertarian critique of power emerges that makes his conception of power crucial to broadening how a politics of freedom can be applied.