ISBN-13: 9780415871402 / Angielski / Twarda / 2009 / 246 str.
ISBN-13: 9780415871402 / Angielski / Twarda / 2009 / 246 str.
Reinterpreting Sartre's main methodologies and removing Hegelian dialectics from his notion of violence, this book demolishes the supposed hostile intersubjective relations that characterizes all concrete relations. Furthering this stance, it reconstructs an interpretation of the "violent Sartre" and crafts an alternative response: one that rejects terrorist tactics, preemptive war and Western hegemony through democratization. Based on the latest debate on Sartre's works on ethics and politics, this project examines the relevancy and new importance they hold for contemporary concerns -- the reactionary nature of terrorism, the extremity of counter-violence, and limitations of democratization efforts -- all claiming to be justified in the name of "freedom" and "liberation." While it is the concern over the "terrorist'" nature of his writings that dominates the current debate, this project starts from the premise that it is as important to ask why violence is unjustified when it can put an end to a situation that disparages humanity. In arguing for the need for moral limitations to all violent struggles, and the need for seeing others as ends-for-themselves, it proceeds to outline a response based on existential humanist ethics that can reaffirm our moral compass.
Based on the latest debate on Jean-Paul Sartre’s works on ethics and politics, this book examines the relevancy and importance Sartre holds for contemporary concerns – the reactionary nature of terrorism, the extremity of counter-violence, and limitations of democratization efforts in our post-9/11 era – all claiming the name of ‘freedom’ and ‘liberation’. It presents a different version of the ‘violent Sartre’, which was presented recently as militant and supportive of terrorism by critics who were concerned with the terrorist nature of his writings. Sartre in this project is reconstructed as a philosopher who, although gave importance to the notion of ‘violence’ in his politics, was actually more concerned with containing violent means within morally excusable limits. He is presented as both a realist who understood the inevitability of ‘dirty hands’ in political struggles and also an absolutist against terrorism; he considered wars that derailed from their purported ends of freedom as morally condemnable. Arguing for the need for moral limitations to all violent struggles, and the need for seeing others as ends-for-themselves, this project outlines an existential response needed to help us reaffirm our moral compass through the invention of existential humanist ethics.