Humorous commitments and non-violent politics: A response to simon Critchley's Infinitely Demanding

Fiona Jenkins*

*Corresponding author for this work

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

    3 Citations (Scopus)

    Abstract

    This discussion of Infinitely Demanding explores the terms of the paradox with which Critchley is centrally concerned: how an ethico-politics can at once begin in disappointment and yet allow for engagement, the infinite renewal of commitment and optimism. Placing this in critical relation to the paradox Rorty meets with his account of the "private ironist and public liberal" in Contingency, Irony, Solidarity, I argue that Critchley's ethico-politics invokes the possibility of a non-ironical categorical imperative, at the meeting point of finitude and the infinite and at the heart of what is also a political space of intersubjectivity. I examine the logic of humour and of commitment within the Kantian frame thus suggested, arguing for their relevance to certain aspects of anarcho-activism, but also for their limitations in desperate circumstances, posing the risk that Critchley's preferred politics falls back into liberal complacency.

    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)257-271
    Number of pages15
    JournalCritical Horizons
    Volume10
    Issue number2
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - 2009

    Fingerprint

    Dive into the research topics of 'Humorous commitments and non-violent politics: A response to simon Critchley's Infinitely Demanding'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this