It’s possible that I shall make an ass of myself. But in that case one can always get out of it with a little dialectic. I have, of course, so worded my proposition as to be right either way (K.Marx, Letter to F.Engels on the Indian Mutiny)
The women’s liberation movement (WLM) can only produce its positive goal of autonomy if the woman question is not reduced to any principle or system of thought. This paper advances a feminist philosophy as a critique of civilization, understood as capitalist-patriarchy. The introductory section, entitled “Capitalist-Patriarchy and its Discontents”, elaborates on the theory of capitalist-patriarchy (developed by Maria Mies) and outlines modern philosophy, from the Enlightenment to Marxism to postmodernism, as its theoretical reflection. This critique of modernity follows from the contributions of Theodor Adorno of the Frankfurt School, with his conception of 'negative dialectics' as dialectics without identity or system. “’Subjection’ and ‘Subjectivization’” responds with an alternative theory of the subject that escapes the impasse of the object-relation which characterizes patriarchy. The feminist subject is established without object-relation, but as a radically solitary embodiment of the real, borrowing from the contemporary theoretical work of Katerina Kolozova, Alain Badiou, and Francois Laruelle, as well as from the psychoanalytic discourse of Jacques Lacan. “Feminist Theory and Practice” expands on the theory of the subject to explain the implications of the patriarchal object-relation in the concept of labor and inthe separation of revolutionary theory and practice. The section furthermore discusses feminism as the invocation of “the feminine” as a virtual reality in which the subject appears without object, but as the instance of the real. The final section "The Body in Pain, Care of the Self" considers blackness as social death in relation to the feminist critique of capitalist-patriarchy. Black women occupy an especially vulnerable space incapitalist-patriarchy which is often taken for granted in the WLM. "The Body in Pain" advances a thesis that the critique of capitalist-patriarchy must be enacted with concern to the designation of black bodies as sentient but dead. This paper proposes to struggle with the persistence of the real against identity-thinking.
David Bedford
Department of Political Science
University of New Brunswick
P.O. Box 4400
Fredericton, New Brunswick
Canada, E3B 5A3
Abstract/Résumé
Aboriginal concerns are among the least studied areas of Marxist thought.
Historically, Aboriginal people have ignored or rejected Marxist ideas. The
author suggests that recent events in Canada have given Marxists an
opportunity to begin building a practical relationship with Aboriginal people.
The left, he notes, must treat Aboriginal demands for cultural survival
seriously.
Adorno, no less than Heidegger or Nietzsche, had his own critical notions of truth/untruth. But Adorno’s readers are unsettled by the barest hint of anything that might be taken to be antiscience. To protest scientism, yes and to be sure, but to protest “scientific thought,” decidedly not, and the distinction is to be maintained even if Adorno himself challenged it. For Adorno, so-called “scientistic” tendencies are the very “conditions of society and of scientific thought.” And again, Adorno’s readers tend to refuse criticism of this kind. Scientific rationality cannot itself be problematic and E. B. Ashton, Adorno’s translator in the mid-1960s, sought to underscore this with the word “scientivistic.” Rather than science, it is scientism that is to be avoided. So we ask: is Adorno speaking here of scientific rationality or scientistic rationality? How, in general, are we to read Adorno?
Pink Floyd and Philosophy, Careful with that Axiom Eugene!
From Marshall McLuhan to Harold Innis,
or From the Global Village to the World Empire
Gaëtan Tremblay
Université du Québec à Montréal
ABSTRACT
The author presents a personal reading of the pioneering contribution to communication studies made by two Canadian thinkers: Marshall McLuhan and Harold A. Innis.
Running countertop the general trend stressing their similarities, he highlights their differences.
Rejecting their technological-determinist standpoint, the author proposes a comprehensive
and critical summary of their analytical frameworks and methodologies, seeking to assess
the influence they have had on his own perspective, tracing the contributions they have made
to the evolution of communication research. The author’s viewpoint is condensed in the title:
we should go back from McLuhan to Innis, from a framework inspired by the global-village
metaphor to one based on the expansion of empire.
Keyword's Innis; McLuhan; Media theory; Technology theory; Globalization
Prometheanism: Technology, Digital Culture and Human Obsolescence (Critical Perspectives on Theory, Culture and Politics)
Annotated Edition, Kindle Edition
Review
Although Günther Anders (1902-1992) is considered one of the most important philosophers of technology and although he spent many years exiled in the US, he received scant attention within the English-speaking world itself. Christopher John Müller’s comprehensive and sophisticated presentation and his nuanced translation of Anders’ crucial writing “On Promethean Shame” should hopefully change this. It demonstrates vividly the significance of Anders as a shrewd and original thinker who was able to anticipate a number of recent societal and technological developments. Müller’s book is crucial reading for anyone wishing to gain a better understanding of the workings of our technology-driven world. (Konrad Paul Liessmann, Professor of Philosophy, University of Vienna)
Who was Günther Anders? In this brilliant book, Christopher Müller not only reconstructs Anders’s crucial place in the history of modern philosophy of technology but shows that Anders still has much to say to us about our own postmodern technological condition. This book is essential reading for anyone interested in critical theory, philosophy of technology and the history of 20th century thought more widely. (Arthur Bradley, Professor of Comparative Literature, Lancaster University)
Building upon (and exceeding) Heidegger on technology, Günther Anders diagnosed the “obsolescence of humanity.” In the posthuman, transhuman era, the Anthropocene dominates obscenity. Departing from Jean-Luc Nancy’s analysis of our technology ‘fetish,’ Christopher Müller’s Prometheanism examines our bodily relation to technology, noting our naked vulnerability, including a cultural critique of the technologies of our lives, our finitude and “Promethean Shame.” (Babette Babich, Professor of Philosophy, Fordham University, NYC)
Modernity aims at placing mankind in the position of being the divine maker of the world while at the same time condemning human beings to see themselves as out of date. German philosopher Günther Anders remains one of the best thinkers of this tragic paradox. It is a shame that his work is almost unknown in the English-speaking world. Christopher Müller’s admirable book will no doubt fill this blatant gap. (Jean-Pierre Dupuy, Professor of Philosophy, École Polytechnique, Paris; Author of A Short Treatise on the Metaphysics of Tsunamis)
Around Anders’s ‘On Promethean Shame’, Müller [describes] the way in which contemporary technology both enhances our perception and obscures our vision, increases our capacity to control while at the same time giving rise to what Gilles Deleuze called a society of control, itself now running out of control. As an attempt at thinking these limits, and at taking thinking to the limit, Müller’s step back to Anders’s finite thinking promises to provide resources for a new thinking in and of the Anthropocene. (Daniel Ross Lo Sguardo)
A book that provides a new inroad to an often overlooked thinker’s work. … When it comes to the great critics of technology Günther Anders is criminally overlooked. … With Prometheanism Müller has done a great two-fold service to Anders – he has provided a wonderful translation of part of one of the key works by Anders, while also providing several chapters that help place Anders’ thought into present discussions … Luckily Müller has done an excellent job of capturing Anders’ wit and pithiness which makes “On Promethean Shame” a pleasure to read despite its considerable pessimism. Yet, what makes Prometheanism particularly noteworthy is the second half of the book wherein Müller considers Anders “in the digital age” – as these four chapters demonstrate the continuing utility of Anders’ thought. This book is a wonderful introduction to a tragically overlooked figure! The Librarian Shipwreck Blog
This is a very important book, and hopefully it will lead to a higher profile for [Günther] Anders’s provocative and essential thought. We owe Christopher Müller a debt of intellectual gratitude. (Thesis Eleven)--This text refers to an alternate kindle_edition edition.
About the Author
Christopher John Müller is an Honorary Research Associate of the School of English, Communication and Philosophy at Cardiff University and an Associate Teacher at the University of Bristol. His recent publications include ‘Desert Ethics: Technology and the Question of Evil in Günther Anders and Jacques Derrida’, Parallax (2015), 21 (1): 42-57 and ‘Style and Arrogance: The Ethics of Heidegger’s Style’, Style in Theory: Between Literature and Philosophy, ed. Ivan Callus, Gloria Lauri-Lucente, James Corby (Continuum, 2013), pp. 141-162. His work draws on Literature, Philosophy and Critical Theory to address the manner in which technological and linguistic structures shape human perception, agency and interaction.--This text refers to an alternate kindle_edition edition.
Edmonton city council to explore next steps towards decriminalization on Monday
Author of the article: Anna Junker Publishing date: Apr 10, 2022 •
A pedestrian walks past advertisements for opioid dependence treatment outside the City Centre Clinic,10264 100 St., in Edmonton on Feb. 7, 2022.
PHOTO BY DAVID BLOOM /Postmedia
Edmonton city council will debate the next steps on decriminalization of personal possession of drugs on Monday.
Council will hear an information report city administration put together on what it would take to pursue an exemption under the federal Controlled Drugs and Substances Act as one step to addressing the increasing drug poisoning crisis in the city.
Coun. Michael Janz, who asked for the report, said he’s heard widespread support for action and next steps from his council colleagues.
“We realize that decriminalization is one step that we can take to remove the stigma and help people move towards treatment and it helps us move towards a public health model rather than a carceral model,” Janz said.
“We know decriminalization is but one measure, there’s multiple measures that need to be taken. Safe supply, permanent supportive housing, harm reduction, drug testing, all of these, we need to try anything we can.”
Edmonton would be the latest jurisdiction in Canada to pursue decriminalization if council decides to move forward.
In January, Toronto Public Health, which sets the public health policy for the municipality of Toronto, submitted a request to Health Canada for an exemption to allow for personal possession of drugs. The City of Vancouver, with support of the Vancouver Coastal Health Authority, and British Columbia have also submitted exemption requests.
Montreal, Ottawa, and Winnipeg are also exploring the possibility of requesting an exemption.
The report notes that if council were to pursue an application for exemption, the preparation of evidence would be a “significant undertaking” that could require “substantial staff time, specialized external expertise and community outreach with ongoing communication and monitoring requirements should any exemption be approved.”
Janz said it is critical the city moves ahead with a broad coalition of community members, including researchers, public health experts, people with lived experience, people who use drugs, and centre a public health model.
“We need to treat this for what it is, a crisis resulting in inadequate action on poverty, mental health and trauma,” he said.
“This is not a criminality problem, but absent safe supply, and absent harm reduction, we see these impacts on our criminal justice system.”
Last year, 1,771 Albertans, including 674 Edmontonians, died of a drug poisoning.
“We need to have a much more empathetic, compassionate, frank conversation and that’s why this has to be a public health issue,” said Janz.
Can owning a dog be a 'selfish' pursuit? This academic thinks so
Social
Red
LinkedIn
Email
People want animals in their lives as ‘accessories,' argues
PhD student Molly Labenski
Nicola Luksic ·
PhD student Molly Labenski is one of about one million Canadians who became a pet owner during the pandemic. While finishing her dissertation examining the portrayal of dogs in American fiction, she rescued a two-year-old Australian shepherd named Duncan. (Hannah Greenwood)
Ideas53:59Of Dogs and Derrida
Digging into the stories of dogs in American literature led Molly Labenski to realize a disconnect in our relationship to canines.
"I think over the last few decades we've developed a bit more of an entitlement when it comes to our relationship with dogs," said Labenski, who is finishing her PhD in English at Queen's University in Kingston, Ont.
Her deep dive into classics like Old Yeller — the story of a devoted dog who saves his human family on numerous occasions but gets a bullet in his head after contracting rabies — reveals a pattern in literature where dogs are discarded once their usefulness to humans subsides.
She says this attitude reflects our real-world relationship to dogs and other animals, arguing that people want them in their lives as "accessories" that can easily be discarded.
Author and professor emerita Josephine Donovan argues animals have a standpoint on the way they're treated. She adds that humans should pay attention to that standpoint when deciding how to treat animals. (Matt Cardy/Getty Images)
Labenski points to the high demand for so-called designer dog breeds, while thousands of dogs in shelters need good homes, as a clear example of that.
These designer dogs include mixed breeds such as goldendoodles (half golden retriever and half poodle) and cockapoos (Cocker spaniel/poodle), which are favoured because they don't shed as much, or pomskies (husky/Pomeranian), which are convenient for people who want smaller dogs.
"It's at the point where we've got designer dogs customized so they can come in any colour, any pattern, any size," said Labenski. "The word 'design' is perfect — you can design a dog in a way that really reduces them to more of a commodity than it does a companion."
"If we really love dogs, we would be trying to help ones that already exist rather than creating ones for our weirdly specific needs," said Labenski, who adopted an Australian shepherd shelter dog during the pandemic.
"I think pet-keeping has become largely a selfish pursuit," she said. "We get dogs specifically for personal reasons that don't really benefit the dogs, whether it's to assuage our own loneliness or if you want to get more exercise, then getting a dog is the way to make that happen. Couples often get dogs to sort of test the waters before they have children."
Pets of all kinds have been in high demand during the pandemic. According to research by conducted by Abacus Data, about 900,000 more Canadians became new pet owners during the pandemic. (This data was collected through an online survey of 1,500 Canadian adults between June 4 and 9, 2021.)
Some animal shelters have noted an increase in pets being given up.
"It's been insane the number of surrenders we get — it's tripled in the time I've worked here," said Cassandra Ferrante, who for the past six years has been working as a dog trainer at Dog Tales, a private animal shelter and rescue near King City, north of Toronto.
"We get at least five to 10 [surrender] applications a day. We can't even keep up with the surrender requests."
Cassandra Ferrante is one of roughly 50 employees caring for dogs at Dog Tales, a rescue shelter that sits on a 20-hectare farm north of Toronto. She’s pictured here with Goji, who has since been successfully adopted. (Submitted by Cassandra Ferrante )
Every year, Dog Tales is able to find adoptive homes for about 350 surrendered and rescued dogs. But for Ferrante, who now manages the kennel, dealing with the surrender requests is difficult.
"It's the least favourite part of my job, I would say, because I can't relate to people who are surrendering their dogs… I can't understand how someone can just dispose of their dog, no matter how hard it is, if you're moving or whatever."
What we can learn about dogs in literature
For her PhD work, Labenski combed through canonical works of American fiction in which dogs are discarded, killed or left for dead. She's identified troubling dog scenes in classics such as Harper Lee's To Kill a Mockingbird, John Steinbeck's The Grapes of Wrath and Toni Morrison's The Bluest Eye.
The working title of Labenski's thesis is "Who Let the Dogs Die?: Domestic Animal Abuse in American Fiction."
"For me, the dog characters in literature are just as important as the human ones," said Labenski. "We think we have this great relationship with animals, but the reality of the fiction shows us otherwise…. The dog is really often ignored as an individual in itself in literature."
Labenski draws on a framework known as animal standpoint theory, which aspires to analyze the literature from the animals' perspective.
Author and professor emerita Josephine Donovan argues animals have a vantage point that humans need to respect, both in the real world and in literature. (Carl Court/Getty Images)
One of the founding figures of this theory is Josephine Donovan, professor emerita in the department of English at the University of Maine and the author of The Aesthetics of Care: On the Literary Treatment of Animals.
"[Animals are] considered commodities," said Donovan. "And under the law, they're considered property. And in science, they're considered objects for laboratory experimentation. And so to the extent that literature comes to stabilize the objectification of animals, that's what animal standpoint criticism is [discouraging]."
Condemning violence against animals in literature is one thing, but Donovan goes further, arguing that animals should not be used in fiction without regard to their own point of view.
"Animals should not just be used as literary devices," said Donovan. "So often, they're just used as symbols or metaphors, or in some way to comment on the state of mind of the human character, and the animal herself is discarded and then basically ignored."
Donovan, whose forthcoming book is called Animals, Mind and Matter, would like to see literature that would "give the animals more voice."
"My overall goal is to break through this objectification and change the whole cultural notion so that we see animals as living subjects who have points of view, who have minds, who have feelings, who have thoughts, who have inner worlds, needs and wishes."
Animals 'rich as metaphors'
While intrigued by certain aspects of animal standpoint theory, fellow author and dog lover Richard Teleky isn't convinced.
"I'm genuinely puzzled about [Donovan's] attitude towards the imagination," said Teleky, editor of an anthology called The Exile Book of Canadian Dog Stories.
"If you are too judgmental about the way writers in the past have used animals, you do a disservice both to the writer and to the past … you're going to wipe out much of Western literature."
Booker-prize winning author Yann Martel also finds the animal-vantage-point approach restrictive.
"The usefulness of animals for me is precisely that they're very rich as metaphors," said Martel, whose novels Life of Pi and Beatrice and Virgil rely on animal characters to tell the story.
Yann Martel — probably best known for his Booker Prize-winning novel Life of Pi — relies heavily on animal characters in all of his books, which serve in highly symbolic or metaphorical roles. (Geoff Howe/Vintage Canada)
"We tend to be very cynical about our own species. We tend not to be cynical about animals, especially wild animals. We imbue animals with a sense of wonder, of marvel, and that's very useful for a storyteller, because then I can take an animal character and right away get beyond your natural cynicism."
As for the violence toward animals in the novels Labenski is studying, Martel argues it can inspire empathy, adding that writing stories strictly from an animal vantage limits the imagination.
"Stories are only useful for us. Animals don't have stories," said Martel, pointing out, for example, that telling the story of a slug from the slug's point of view serves no purpose for that creature. "And it'll be quite dull for us, because a slug has a very limited intellect."
Labenski remains committed to advocating for animals — even fictional ones.
"There'll always be a bit of a discrepancy between the opinions of literary critics and authors," she said. "I would say [to authors] to consider animals more fully than they are right now. It is easy to make animals ornamental in literature, because they are rather ornamental in our lives already."
Guests in this episode (in order of appearance):
Molly Labenski is a Queen's University PhD student in the English department. The working title of her thesis is "Who Let the Dogs Die?: Domestic Animal Abuse in American Fiction."
Cassandra Ferrante is a dog trainer at Dog Tales animal sanctuary near Newmarket, Ont.
Josephine Donovan is a professor emerita in the department of English at the University of Maine and the author of The Aesthetics of Care: On the Literary Treatment of Animals. Her forthcoming book is called On Animals, Mind and Matter.
Richard Telekyis a retired professor in the humanities department at York University and author of Dog on the Bed: a Canine Alphabet. He's also editor of the anthology The Exile Book of Canadian Dog Stories.
Yann Martel is the author of Life of Pi, which won the Man Booker Prize in 2002. Other novels include The High Mountains of Portugal and Beatrice and Virgil.
Written by Nicola Luksic. This episode is part of the Ideas from the Trenches series, produced by Nicola Luksic and Tom Howell.
Convoy protesters talked a lot about freedom. But here’s the real threat to Canadians being free
For many, economic and social circumstances restrict them from living truly free lives.
Freedom has been in the public conversation a lot these days. Especially issues of freedom of speech and in the convoy movement. It’s no accident those occupations and blockades grounded their protest in appeals to freedom. Early into the pandemic, anti-vaccination activists found that theories about nano-chips and side effects hidden by evil governments, were not mainstream ideas.
But arguing the choice to resist vaccination was a human rights issue, an issue of human freedom — that had a lot more traction. Because human rights and freedom — thank God — are mainstream ideas in Canada.
Freedom is also a trending topic due to the very real struggle for freedom going on in Ukraine. As many have noted, the war in Ukraine helps crystallize the difference between a government that clumsily has tried to protect us from a generational crisis with some limits on civil liberties, and the reality of facing down an actual dictator.
Canada, despite what the detractors say, remains a place with an extremely high level of political and civil freedom. But a disturbingly large amount of Canada thinks otherwise. A recent Nanos polls showed 8.3 per cent of respondents believed threats to our freedoms are the nation’s biggest issue, the second-largest issue in the poll.
Now I want to be clear: I may not share the concerns some have about us losing our freedom of speech or individual liberties due to COVID-19 controls. But I think it’s a totally legitimate opinion for someone to have. And despite evidence to the contrary, I believe it’s still essential in 2022 for people with different ideas to engage in open discussion and mutual learning. Especially about an idea like freedom.
But the problem is our public discourse is dominated by a singular, limited view of freedom. Focused on our individual civil rights such as: the right to vote or freedom of religion. Rights regarding an individual’s ability to receive fair and equal treatment under the law, and not have government or others restrict their ability to make their own decisions.
But a free society is about everyone having a real ability to make their own life choices. Freedoms that only exist on paper, that you can’t use, are dead in the water. It’s like a having a car but no gas. And for many, economic and social circumstances restrict them from living truly free lives.
Which means freedom includes making a living wage, so you can spend time with your kids every day, not be forced to hustle between survival jobs. Freedom is being able to afford housing, without having to sacrifice groceries to make rent. Or being able to access the therapy you need to escape the cage of depression and anxiety.
Don’t consider this part of freedom? Well, let’s look at history. Immediately after Americans achieved a degree of equality under the law with the Civil Rights Act in 1964, civil rights leaders shifted their focus to amplifying work around fighting poverty. They knew Black Americans would never be truly free without economic freedom.
A few years later in 1966 the United Nations drafted a covenant on economic, social and cultural rights, outlining the other rights needed to have a free society, like the right to health care, labour rights and a basic standard of living.
And in Canada in 1964 Emmett Hall drafted a report that laid the foundations for Medicare in Canada, arguing that universal public health care including dental, pharma, mental-health and home care were critical components to a free society.
Freedom is more than just an ability to say whatever you want on social media or give government the finger if they ask you to do something you’re uncomfortable with.
But the political left has let populists and libertarians define our debates on freedom recently. And in truth within the Western tradition there has always been more consensus around a limited definition of freedom, focused on individual civil liberties.
Yet if we step back from our current context, it’s possible to imagine other ways to organize and achieve a free society.
David Graeber and David Wengrow in their landmark publication “The Dawn of Everything,” write in depth about the role Indigenous peoples of Eastern Canada had in shaping European ideas on freedom during the Enlightenment. Their intriguing (and controversial) theories argue that accounts of Jesuits debating Indigenous intellectuals during the 1700s set off formative debates in the salons and cultural institutions across continental Europe.
They argue that these Indigenous thinkers looked on in horror at Europe, where life seemed incredibly oppressive. People in their societies worked less, were healthier, had higher degrees of women’s rights, leaders who ruled by consent — and there was almost no ability for someone to use economic/political power to force a person to do something they didn’t want to do.
But as Graeber and Wengrow write, these freedoms could only exist because Indigenous people built a society based on mutual aid and economic sharing. People had freedom to chose how they would live their lives because food, land and shelter were shared by default. No one could be forced to work from fear of starving and leaders had to rely on competence to get people to follow them.
Obviously, our current society is different from pre-colonial peoples like the Huron-Wendat. But if we drop the cultural superiority, we can recognize we are not the first “free” people to walk these lands. Indigenous societies are just one example of the different ways human beings have linked civil and economic rights to build a free society.
So let’s talk about freedom. On the left we need to hear people’s concerns on freedom of speech and individual autonomy. And on the right, there must be openness to talk about how true freedom is contingent on everyone having the basics needed to make a real go at life. We can wave our flags and fight for our causes but let’s also step up to the moment and have real dialogue about what freedom truly means.
Kofi Hope is a freelance contributing columnist for the Star. He is based in Toronto. Follow him on Twitter: @kofi_hopeSHARE:
