Sacrificing Justice
Suffering Animals, the Oresteia, and the Masks of Consent
Datos Bibliográficos
| ID | 6351663 |
|---|---|
| Autores | Stefan Dolgert (0009-0000-8626-6966, University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT, USA, autor de correspondencia) |
| Año | 2012 |
| Volumen | 40 |
| Número | 3 |
| Páginas | 263-289 |
| Fecha de publicación | 2012-06-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Sí |
| Open Access | Sí |
| Tipo | ARTICLE |
| Revista | Political Theory (JOURNAL) |
| Identificadores de la revista | ISSN: 0090-5917 • E-ISSN: 1552-7476 |
| Editorial | SAGE Publications Inc (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1177/0090591712439302 |
| OpenAlex | W2132333290 |
| Idioma | EN |
| Citas recibidas | 8 |
Democratic theorists have increasingly turned to Aeschylus’ Oresteia as a resource for challenging the shortcomings of liberal theory, but I argue that this particular return to Greek tragedy should be treated with a healthy dose of skepticism. Defenders of Aeschylean justice have underplayed the sacrificial aspects of his solution to the problem of civil strife, mistaking the consent of the Furies for a resolution that escapes the cycle of violence. Drawing on elements of Greek ritual practice, I contend that Aeschylus folds the consent of the Furies into a sacrificial framework which denies the violence it enacts by directing this violence toward nonhumans. As a consequence Aeschylean justice is complicit in continuing the sacrificial economy it seems to subvert, and Aeschylean politics relies on the suffering of nonhumans (and humans) to secure its conception of order
Business · Democracy · Economic Justice · Epistemology · Order (exchange · Political science · Politics · Skepticism · Social science · Sociology · Tragedy (event · Classical Antiquity Studies · Law · Philosophy · Weber, Simmel, Sociological Theory
| Obras citantes distintas | 8 |
|---|---|
| Citas por año | 0,73 |
| Intervalo de citas | 2015 - 2024 (10) |
| Velocidad de citación | recent |
| Altamente citado | No |
| Tipos de cita | Neutras: 8 |