Arendt Lecture Notes

8/12/2019 Arendt Lecture Notes

1/16

Arendt

I am doing Oct. 16: On Revolution Ch.s 1-4 & Nov. ! "Civil #iso$edience%

' 1

Arendt has said that she is not a (hiloso(her) she is a (olitical thin*er. And she (uts such an em(hasison the loss o+ the (olitical , e dont have a (olitical e (erience. /o) critics sa0: oh) the greeks had (olitical e (erience , she is ust longing +or the gree*s.

/he indeed stresses the loss o+ the (olitical , $ut it is hard to inter(ret.

1. 2odernit0 has reneged on its (romise o+ +reedom) li$ert0) ustice) etc . . .. 3he loss o+ the (olitical as the death o+ ustice ie totalitarian rule5. 3he loss o+ the a$ilit0 to thin* (oliticall0 action) (olitics) +reedom) (o er5

4. 3he loss o+ (olitical e (erience means e cannot thin* (olitical ords $ecause e lost theiroriginative e (eriences.1. 3he conce(tion o+ (o er has changed +rom a (o er o+ the (eo(le to that o+ governments ,

ma0$e5

7. Action) (o er) +reedom are lost to the (ast6. 3he (olitical has al a0s $een lost) and al a0s needs rene ing.

/o) e ma0 as*) does Arendt have something to sa0 to the (olitics o+ resistance8 9eards orth thin*sArendt is a constitutional democrat.

lato tied the (olitical to elements that dont stem +rom (olitical e (erience , he drove a division $et een (hiloso(h0 and the (olitical) the command the (olitical +rom the realm o+ ideas. 3hat isde+initel0 a ;uestion +or her. "#oes (hiloso(h0 o++er an alternative to the isdom o+ /ilenus8%


2/16

/o) hat can (olitical anal0sis $e in relation to hat is un(recedented. 3he (henomena o+ human $eings dont have causes) $ecause human $eings arent causes? the0re ca(acities.In our attem(ts to anal0>e human a++airs) e tend to $e $ound u( in our rationali>ed conce(tions , and

e go +or e (lanation. B (lanation is not an a((ro(riate anal0sis +or human a++airs it is a((ro(riate+or certain mechanistic ' scienti+ic things5.

Arendt see> the essence o+ totalitarian rule as concentration cam(s. 3he (oint o+ totalitarian rule istotal domination.


3/16

A radical evil that $rea*s do n all standards. 3he e ecution o+ the doctrine o+ ideolog0 is tooconsistent , it ma*es h0(er-sense. #oes Arendt call it Fa$solute evil instead o+ radical evil853he process not the result5 is intelligi$le. 3he (rocess o+ (roducing living cor(ses can $e made senseo+) $ut the result the cam(s5 is insane. 3he survivors couldnt $elieve hat the0 ere reporting a+terthe event. 3here is no a0 to intellig$l0 relate the ha((enings o+ the cam(s so as to form a stor0.

Fcommon sense she is $eing e tremel0 critical o+ li$eralism. ation. 3he central institution o+ totalitarianism is the cam(s.

3he process is intelligi$le. 3otalitarianism cannot $e com(leted) the (rocess cannot $e reali>ed. 3hereis an internal contradiction) here dominance need to dominate , its success is its o n immediatede+eat.

/tanding u( ithin the cam(s as made im(ossi$le , there ere things) issues) $ut no a0 to resist.3here is no possibility +or ma*ing a di++erence in this totali>es environment.

3otal domination has no need o+ consent or o((osition. 2art0rdom is im(ossi$le.


4/16

3he NJrem$erg a s ere (art o+ the (rocess o+ the cam(s. 3his (oint) these la s) un+oldedine ora$l0 into the (ro ect o+ the cam(s $e+ore the cam(s had $een invented. 3he Ke s ere not onl0denationali>ed) the0 ere not allo ed to marr0. 3he loss o+ the uridical (erson didnt mean 0ou

erent citi>ens) $ut that 0ou couldnt +uc*. ove-ma*ing $et een Lerman and Ke as no longer (ermitted. 90 not $eing orth0 o+ love) the0 ere no longer orth0 o+ li+e. enshi(8

--- =uman Condition ,

2an cannot as* hat he is) $ut ho. And F ho can onl0 $e expressed in (olitical action. ree action.

One mustnt +orget ho much e ile is an im(ortant e (erience +or Arendts develo(ment as a thin*er.Rights must $e (olitical. Americans guaranteed these rights ith god , the rench) (oor +ol*) ithnature.

a$or is ever0thing that involves nature-li+e. #eathlessness is the li*e the c0clicalit0 o+ the (erserverance o+ the s(ecies.


5/16

a +or ancient Lree*s: 3he la +or the (olis is the $oundar0 $et een the (rivate and the (u$lic.9oundaries are anus-+aced , there is $oth the (rivate and the (u$lic ithin the F all o+ the la . ais the condition o+ the (olis) hich is condition o+ the li+e) the human not omen & slaves5. 3hehousehold realm har$ors things +rom visi$ilit0 , the household la s are governed $0 la s o+ the hearth

the names o+ these gods are in the main Roman5. 3he la o+ the household is sacred privacy . 3he

sacred lives as a condition o+ human e istence in the household . /o(hocles se>: Antigone is the eternaliron0 o+ the communit0.

/acred (rivac0 is not the location , the la the $ounds a home is s(ace) li*e a no-mans land.

Arendt is arguing +or the constitution. A Grenze that can +lo ) that is d0namic ,9eards orth se> that constitutional democrac0 is the sacred +or her.

"Nothing counts that cannot $e seen or heard.%/egragation must $e or*ed out ithin the +rame or* o+ the (olitical constitution.

#iscrimination is legitimate ithin the social , its di++erences5 emergence into the (olitical isdangerous. 3he government has a dut0 to ma*e sure that (rivate and social di++erence'discriminationare not legall0 en+orced.

3he idea o+ the (olitical is that there must $e an us , the I that is a e) and e that is I. ichte rotethis essa0 called the "Closed trading estate%: e need a Lerman nation) ith a hard limit.


6/16

Cadavers , the0 could $e num$ers) $ut hat (oint ould there $e to num$ers8Arendt starts the $oo* ith the state o+ science) and sa0s that its all ver0 ell) $ut here are e going

ith all this8 oe the s(ecies5) not $ios.3here is a +eeling o+ la$or as routini>ed deathlessness , the la$or dis(laces human recollection)in ardi>ation. /a0eth 2ar : relations $et een things are li*e relations $et een (ersons) and viceversa.

Arendt ants 2ar s conce(t o+ la$or to $e work .


7/16


8/16

Hou can read lato in t o a0s) and she goes +or the moment o+ domination) ie using the ideas as themeasure +or the cave.

/o) introducing contingenc0 into the realm o+ (olitics) is reall0 tr0ing to $e true to the (rinci(les o+e;ualit0 and +reedom.

Rousseau as*ed Fho can e have ustice as ell as utilit08 =o can e have +reedom ithin the $od0 (olitic8 that the (o er o+ rule does not have authori>ation over the authorit0 o+ the (eo(le. =ocan there $e citi>enshi( that does not +all into su$ ection to rule8 =o can there $e (o er that does notover(o er the authorit0 o+ the (eo(le8 ation.

ets thin* o+ latos dialogues) and $ehind those) /ocrates s(eech.


9/16

Is the Ira; ar histor0 alread08 Can it give a lesson o+ histor08 Or are e still living it) still holding itin our hands) or at the read0) ithout 0et assimilating it to the te ts o+ histor0 in the dead sense. =o

ide o+ a tem(oral $and idth can our culture maintain8 7 0ears8 8 1 8

Contingency of action per se is a principle of freedom .

Narratives are (o ers o+ sta$ili>ation.

Courage is di++icult $ecause it ris*s sel+-certaint0 , nevertheless) onl0 courage can (rovide ano((ortunit0 +or +illing the sel+ o+ hich it is certain. 3imidit0) hiddenness) has no sel+ o+ hich to $ecertain. /el+-disclosure according to Arendt could onl0 occur i+ someone has the courage to e it thehouse) enter the orld o+ re(resentation) gain the symbolic . =o does the realm o+ re(resentationmaintain the e$ out o+ hich the ne meaning might arise.

=egel as tr0ing to sa0 , i+ 0ou have a (ure conce(t li*e Dant5) the (ure conce(t must e ternali>eitsel+. No ) a conce(t is something understood. 3his stands in Dant as understanding) com(osed o+ the

(ure categories. /urel0 the categories have a histor0. =egel sa0s) have the courage to go out o+ 0ourconce(t into #asein) into e istence. Into a (oem) e (erience) into a science. ens in the orld.


10/16

Bvents and instances disru(t a (ast that (resses +or ard , the0 are not 0et e (erience. =o can ecom(rehend an0thing hen all the categories o+ com(rehension have no ans er. Act I) thee istentialists lost the a$ilit0 +or as*ing meaning+ul ;uestions in and through hich the0 could ma*esense o+ our e istence. =egel re(laces all authorities o+ tradition ith the (hiloso(h0 o+ continuoushistor0 , D.2.N. /ho us that in +act e donPt even have that continuit0.

Is Action a conce(tual +rame or* through hich e can regain our sense o+ remem$rance.

Da+*aPs =B is not $et een t o events ,

Action enters into the e$ o+ human relationshi(s , ePve lost this inso+ar as the modern age ' modernorld acts into nature or histor0) hich set o++ endless (rocesses that are meaningless. 2odern

scienti+ic acts do not have a revelator0 character) the0 do not reveal the (erson o+ the actor or can $eta*en u( in a stor0.


11/16

me8 ation ith thisram(ant digital e teriori>ation.

Remem$er: (u$lic ha((iness) (u$lic +reedom are shared ;ualities. 3he0 are not a matter o+ a single (erson. Imagine that i+ e reall0 did +eel li*e e can march on : reasoning is rec*oning ith conse;uences. 3here as a shift that she calls the modern age)and that shi+t is a shi+t in our ca(acit0 to hold on to the notion o+ truth that e have had throughout the

(hiloso(hical tradition. ItPs accessi$le $0 the instruments e ield) so e can onl0 *no hat emade.

N.9. 3hat nature and histor0 are not even di++erent an0 more.

An em$lem o+ the (ro$lem o+ $eing ithin the ga() is that the conce(ts e use in order to get a gri( onthe situation) our conce(ts are em(t0 li*e the grave5 , e are gras(ing at stra s.


12/16

distrust. 3here are onl0 reasons to distrust) never reasons to trust. 3rust in elders never had reasons , itas in the +orm o+ tradition. =o$$es gives us the notion that e distrust others) not ust the orld. 3hea0 he un+olds this is on the e(istemological grounds o+ modern science. ed gree* thought) the too* it on and made it their authorit0) $ecause the Romansere so intent on +inding tradition.


13/16

(olitical realm) so e can see hat it essential structure is.

3he ;ualit0 o+ an o(inion is im(artialit0) it $elongs to the realm o+ +reedom) it is trans(arent.

acts are indestructi$le $rutall0 elementar0 data.3he issue toda0 is that +acts have $een trans+ormed into o(inions) and no there are not strict

distinctions $et een +acts and o(inions) so our (olitical de$ates are not a$out o(inions.In the modern su$ ect there is a direm(tion $et een inner-+reedom and outer-un+reedom? an inversiono+ intentions and institutions. B.g.) good intentions $ecome social actions $ecome $ad deeds , thisthreatens the su$ ect ith a constant return to an stric*en conscience.

Bichmann is res(onsi$le +or hat he did ,

egalit0 needs not to $e divorced +rom moralit0 ,

3o 9eards orth the limit nightmare o+ modernit0 is that human dignit0 ill disa((ear) or thedestruction o+ humanit0 , trans+ormation into s(ecimens.

No ) there are certain +eatures o+ totalitarianism that resem$le modern societ0. Recall thattotalitarianism as a solution to a ;uestion as*ed $0 modernit0.

3he di++erence $et een the traditional lie and the modern lie is that $et een hiding and destro0ing.3he sense 9edeutung5 ith hich e ta*e our $earings in the real orld is $eing destro0ed.

1!' !'1o er can onl0 $e chec*ed $0 (o er.

3he di++erence $et een the interest o+ a single nation , and the endurance o+ a $od0-(olitic. =o isthat to $e made clear8

3he constitution is the (romising that ma*es the (romising e (licit as the setting o+ the terms o+ ourli+e together.

No ) the general ill is a theoretical su$stitute +or an a$solute monarch0.

3here is a principle o+ revolution that is not shared $0 ar , itPs all there in the rench revolution) in (rinci(le) $ut the rench revolution +ailed to $ear it out.ation hich is not strictl0 connected tothe (ast) $ut $reathes a ne s(irit into the (resent. 3he monument has the (o er to carr0 +or ard thes(irit o+ a (ast act.

No ) the men o+ the revolution anted the (ursuit o+ (u$lic ha((iness. =a((iness is +idelit0 to theConstitution. Bven (u$lic el+are doesnPt necessaril0 mean m0 (ersonal (articular right to more cand0.Ke++erson as unclear a$out hat he meant , i+ he meant private welfare ) then the (ur(ose o+ thegovernment is to (rotect (rivate (ro(ert0. 3he $ourgeois $od0-(olitic is the (rotection o+ li+e) notli$ert0.


14/16

i$ert0 is a manner o+ a certain *ind o+ action , ords and deeds in concert.

es the ruler) ho has the sta++ o+ legitimac0and s ord o+ (o er. =o$$es ma*es the (eo(le the source o+ government? this is hat the Buro(eansgot rong. 3he source o+ legitimac0 and the source o+ legalit0 are not $oth $uilt u( out o+ unanimous

(eo(le. Rousseau) again) ma*es the ill o+ the (eo(le the $asis o+ legalit0. Dant thought that Rousseauas cra>0) and $ased legitimac0 on reason.

or Rousseau) the (eo(le are the general source o+ (o er) and the general ill is the source o+ legalit0.

No ) +or 9eards orth) an act o+ return is not an original +oundation. Constitutions are acts o++ounding. "3he (rinci(les had $een +ormulated and discussed prior to the revolution.% 3heconstitution made mani+est) as the second tas* o+ the revolution) the (rinci(le o+ (romising , and that isnot the social contract. 3here are t o sides) +issured in the social contract: the consent to $e ruled) andthe esta$lishment o+ one (eo(le-$od0. All 0ou can get out o+ these t o u(shots o+ social contracttheor0 is another s0stem o+ sovereignt0.

aine se>: the (eo(le $esto the constitution on the government.5

ItPs eas0 to +all $ac* into a (olitics that res(onds to su++ering , the (ro$lem is that it $ecomes unethicalor immoral and instead $ecomes a (olitics o+ (art0 (o er. 3he (olitics o+ (it0 cannot $e the (olitics o++ounding.

3he normative authorit0 o+ the constitution is (romising.


15/16

3his tem(oralit0 o+ return is not a tem(oralit0 o+ (recedence , itPs a sur(rise ever0 time. 3he +all o+ the9erlin ation.

es (olitics. romising is not a means to an end , it is the condition +or the (ossi$ilit0 o+ means-ends. 3he orld is +ar too dominated $0 instrumentals0stems and $ureaucrati>ation.=er (olitical thought ma*es no sense unless 0ou recall that her historical (henomenolog0 is meant toreconstruct conce(ts on the modern stage.

Classical social contract theor0 does not unite +reedom ith (o er.

11'6'1 On Revolution 7&6

Is historical time ob!ectively continuous8 #oesnPt nature tend to use u( its time and aim to ard +inalrest8Is the a$solute a Pdivine (rinci(leP , hat is it +or a (rinci(le to $e divine8


16/16

/o) what is the act of foundation) =o can there $e a revolutionar0 s(irit that is a ne $eginning thathas a lasting institution88 3here must $e a lasting s(ace o+ a((earances in hich each and ever0 (ersoncan come out into the o(en and act ,

2aterial transactions see* an e;uili$rium) no matter the e (ense to an0 initial varia$le , economic stu++

shi+ts and +ree>es according to an invisi$le hand hich is unseen $0 (rinci(le) $ecause it is onl0 ever a+orce $ehind its e (ression. 3he +acult0 +or novelt0) +or natalit0) is the something o+ a sel+-movinglode-stone) it is the missing element that $0 its natural a$sence (recludes (er(etual motion. 9ut it isreal , action is a$le to leave the e$ o+ human a++airs and get an im(ossi$le $reath o+ +resh air) in order to (lunge $ac* in to the e$ and e hale.

=o do 0ou balance sta$ilit0 and novelt08o er is not !ust there . 3here can $e a state o+ no (o er. It is not automaticall0 conserved. *orce is

ust there.

3he (o er o+ (romising is the groundless ground , this is h0 it is unthin*a$le to me , it seems li*e itmust $e re(lenished) again and again) lest it +alls to (ieces.

A((earing in the (u$lic realm to tell onePs stor0 as a once-o$scured (eo(le. Is this not the concern iththe PmainstreamP , the PmainstreamP.

Documents

Arendt Lecture Notes