Autonomy and Redemption: Reply to Gonzales, Breines and Wolin

Telos: Critical Theory of the Contemporary 1986 (69):146-157 (1986)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

My intention in writing “The Politics of Redemption” (Telos #63) — which was admittedly polemical and therefore somewhat overstated — was in part to stimulate theoretical controversy within me journal. It seemed at the time that Telos was suffering from stagnation camouflaged by animated political debates, and that an open and even heated discussion of basic theoretical issues might prove healthy and productive. I was therefore pleased to see the responses to my article and welcome the opportunity to clarify and elaborate my position. I would now state my diesis in die following way: Modernity is a fundamentally ambivalent — if not antinomic — phenomenon which requires a sufficiently differentiated conceptual scheme to capture die elements of diat ambivalence; contrawise, an insufficiendy differentiated theory cannot do justice to that ambivalence and mutatis mutandis to the social, political and historical situation in which we find ourselves

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 103,203

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2013-11-03

Downloads
47 (#491,890)

6 months
6 (#572,300)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Joel Whitebook
Columbia University

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references