Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Results found: 6

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  Stanley Cavell
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
EN
Not many readers will recognize Disowning Knowledge: Seven Plays of Shakespeare by Stanley Cavell as either a piece of philosophical writing or literary criticism, so it may be useful to ask what method Cavell uses to read literature, what are the main features of his approach, and whether he has a coherent view on what reading literature means. I examine Cavell’s interdisciplinary eclecticism, the feature which makes his work so original, and I describe his moving away from the British and American analytic tradition in which he was trained to other sources of inspiration, especially Thoreau. I also stress the important fact that Cavell does not avoid autobiographical motifs in his writings, the style of which derives to some extent from the Jewish tradition of storytelling. In his writings Cavell declares his adherence to an ahistorical approach, maintaining that in a sense philosophy is trans‑historical. In many of his books the central issue is the challenge that skepticism poses, and he endeavors to make a convincing case against it. Although Cavell’s work covers a broad range of interests, including tragedy and literature, as well as Romantic poetry, Shakespeare, Henry James and Samuel Beckett, I try to answer the question of why his analyses of skepticism in literature focus especially on the works of Shakespeare.
EN
According to Stanley Cavell, in Shakespeare’s Othello Desdemona plays a similar role to that of God in Descartes famous skeptical thought experiment. For Descartes, God is a guarantee of the existence of the external world including the body of thinking subject himself. The subject looks for a reference point in the world but does not find it, only God can be such a point of reference. Othello is similarly separated from the source of his own existence. His ideal imagination of himself is founded in something external to himself: in the idealized picture of Othello, whose only source is Desdemona. For Othello she (or rather her love) is an equivalent of the Cartesian God. If not for God and his real existence, the skeptic would remain trapped in the sphere of his own conceptual constructs, in the sphere of ideas. Even his own body, as an element of the external world, would be inaccessible to him. Therefore proving the real existence of God is necessary for the skeptic in order to prove his own real existence. The real existence of Desdemona, the reality of her love has a similarly fundamental meaning for Othello. Desdemona’s alleged betrayal, or perhaps even the possibility of this betrayal, is like a foundation of Othello’s being sliding out from beneath his feet. After entering onto the path of doubt Othello gradually slides into the abyss. This process does not have a logical end, thus the disproportionality of the despair, the radicalism that is shocking to the reader. Othello’s despair is driven by the power of its own dynamic, resembling the mechanism of the deepening psychosis. At this stage the mere facts of the external words has only secondary meaning for the internal decay of the mind, resembling the chain reaction. It can only by stopped by a feeling of certainty. However, since Othello cannot be certain as to the faithfulness of his wife, his uncertainty soon develops into an irrational conviction of Desdemona’s adultery. This Othello’s conviction leads protagonists of the drama to the final tragedy.
Ethics in Progress
|
2016
|
vol. 7
|
issue 1
199-213
EN
Ricoeur's theory of narrative identity is not his last word when it comes to philosophy of selfhood. This paper aims to outline how the findings of one of Ricoeur's final books, The Course of Recognition fit into Ricoeur’s philosophy of selfhood, and to do so by comparing Ricoeur’s analyses of the concept of recognition and Stanley Cavell’s explorations of the idea of acknowledgment. Cavell, much of whose philosophy investigates “the extent to which my relation to myself is figured in my relation to my words,” can show recognition to be not only the gaining of knowledge, but the outward affirmation, acceptance, agreement to that knowledge (in language). That requirement of outwardness, of intersubjectivity, is what makes acknowledgment crucial for theories of selfhood. 
PL
Tożsamość narracyjna jest kategorią niezbędną dla współczesnej antropologii filozoficznej,a w szczególności dla filozofii podmiotu, co artykuł ten pokaże na przykładzie fenomenu,który Stanely Cavell określa ironią ludzkiej tożsamości: chodzi o fakt, iż każdyczłowiek ma poczucie, że wymyka się nieco wszelkim opisom, jakich dostarcza o nimświat, a nawet on sam. To poczucie, że jego istota, w sensie Ricoeurowskiego ipsé, pozostajezawsze w jakiś sposób niewysłowiona, co więcej, że może on w każdym momenciezanegować swą obecną tożsamość. Niniejsza praca wykazuje, iż z jednej strony narracyjneujęcie podmiotowości jest niezbędne, by zdać sprawę z tego napięcia, a z drugiej, że jakodziałanie językowe narracja narażona jest na swą własną ironię: napięcie między językiemjako danym a językiem jako twórczym, wciąż szukającym nowych sposobów ekspresji. Taistotna relacja między językiem a podmiotem otwiera pole do dalszych badań.
EN
Narrative identity is an essential category of contemporary philosophical anthropology,and especially philosophy of selfhood, simply cannot do without. This article will illustratethis specific point with the example of the phenomenon which Stanely Cavell calls ‘theirony of human identity’: the fact that every human being has a sense of surpassing anydescriptions that may be offered him/her by the surrounding world, or even by him/herself.A sense that my very self, in the sense of the Ricoeurian ipsé, which somehow alwaysremains unexpressed, and, what is more, that I, the subject, can negate my current identityat any moment. Here, the aim is to show that, on the one hand, a narrative understandingof selfhood is necessary to do justice to this ironic tension, and, on the other, that narrationas an act of language use is itself exposed to an irony of its own: the tension between language as a system, as something given and inherited, and language as a creative mediumwhere a constant search for new forms of expression continues. The meaning of thisrelationship between language and the human self begs further research.
Human Affairs
|
2014
|
vol. 24
|
issue 1
103-111
EN
Is pragmatism, as focused on a future considered producible by our finite actions, ill equipped to analyze religion (or “Erlösungswissen”, as Max Scheler said); is it unable, as Stanley Cavell writes, to sufficiently explore “skepticism” and negativity? This paper argues that William James succeeds in pragmatically re-thematizing “Erlösungswissen”, and that Josiah Royce-who develops a post-pragmatic, pragmaticist concept of; religion-carefully re-investigates “negativity”, in a Peirce-inspired mode, by focusing on the “mission of sorrow”.
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.