Theory and Practice of Modern Criticism (About the Book “A Time for Critique”)

Meshcheryakova N.N. ,

Tomsk Polytechnic University, Tomsk, Russia; Tomsk State University, Tomsk, Russia, natalia.tib@mail.ru

elibrary_id: 611303 | ORCID: 0000-0001-7658-7993 |

DOI: 10.17976/jpps/2021.02.12

Rubric: Reflecting on Matters in Print

For citation:

Meshcheryakova N.N. Theory and Practice of Modern Criticism (About the Book “A Time for Critique”). – Polis. Political Studies. 2021. No. 2. https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2021.02.12

Abstract

The book “A Time for Critique” (2019. ed. B.E. Harcourt, D. Fassin. New York: Columbia University Press) deals with the current state of critical theory and its practical application in the political and public spheres. The space of criticism is narrowing. This weakness is connected with the fears critical thinkers have regarding mass movement and class struggles, with how impotent criticism is against the background of the weakening of liberal ideology and the strengthening of the right-wings in politics and public life, and with the triumph of positivism in the academic environment, which is understood as the self-worth of a fact to the detriment of its critical thinking. Nevertheless, the authors call for updating and promoting the program of critical social theory. The grounds for optimism are the emergence (under pressure from the external environment) of new forms of critical thinking and activities within the academic sphere, and the emergence of new forms of critical intervention in the form of social movements and other methods of civil society’s self-organization outside the academic schools.

Keywords

critical theory, critical practices, social fields, positivism, pragmatism.

Full Text

References

A Time for Critique. 2019. Ed. by B.E. Harcourt, D. Fassin. New York: Columbia University Press. 320 p.

Hardt M., Negri A. 2017. Assembly. New York: Oxford University Press. 368 p.

Seron C. 2016. The Two Faces of Law and Inequality: From Critique to the Promise of Situated, Pragmatic Policy. – Law and Society Review. Vol. 50. No. P. 9-33. https://doi.org/10.1111/lasr.12194

Bourdieu P. 2005. Espace social et genese des classes (Russ. ed.: Bourdieu P. Sotsial’noe prostranstvo: polya i praktiki. St. Petersburg: Aletheia; Moscow: Institute of experimental sociology. 576 p.).

Horkheimer M. 2011. Eclipse of Reason (Horkheimer M. Zatmenie razuma. K kritike instrumental’nogo razuma. Moscow: Canon+ROOI Rehabilitation. 224 p. (In Russ.)

Kapustin B.G. 2001. The End of “Transitology”? (Reflecting on the First Post-Communist Decade as Subject of Theoretical Interpretation). – Polis. Political Studies. No. 4. P. 6-26. (In Russ.)

Neklessa A.I. 2013. Ongoing Plebiscite. Genetics of Civil Society. – Polis. Political Studies. № 2. P. 24-39. (In Russ.) URL: https://www.politstudies.ru/article/4684 (accessed 16.01.2020).

Nikovskaya L.I. 2012. Civil Society and Protests: What is behind that? – Monitoring of Public Opinion: Economic and Social Changes. No. 4. P. 5-13. (In Russ.) URL: https://book.wciom.ru/fileadmin/file/monitoring/2012/110/2012_110_01_nikolskaya.pdf (accessed 16.01.2020).

Oganisyan Yu.S. 2020. Phenomenon of Totalitarianism: Exit to the Twenty-First Century. – Polis. Political Studies. No. 2. P. 167-177. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2020.02.12

Simakova M.A. 2018. Political Reaction as Passive Revolution: Attempting a Conceptualization. – Sociology of Power. Vol. 30. No. 4. P. 47-68. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.22394/2074-0492-2018-4-47-68

Toshchenko Z.T. 2011. Kentavr-problema (Opyt filosofskogo i sotsiologicheskogo analiza) [Centaur-Problem (Experience of Philosophical and Sociological Analysis)]. Moscow: Novyi khronograph. 536 p. (In Russ.)

Content No. 2, 2021