Immanent Critique in Thucydides’ Mytilenean Debate and Melian Dialogue
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 12643290 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Otto Linderborg (0000-0003-0222-2240, Mid Sweden University, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2022 |
| Volume | 23 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pages | 44-54 |
| Publication date | 2022-01-02 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Critical Horizons (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 1440-9917 • E-ISSN: 1568-5160 |
| Publisher | Taylor & Francis (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1080/14409917.2022.2054184 |
| OpenAlex | W4220770756 |
| Language | EN |
| References cited | 8 |
This article investigates social critique in Thucydides’ History of thePeloponnesian War. Two famous Thucydidean episodes are in focus:the Mytilenean Debate in Book III and the Melian Dialogue in BookV of the History. These episodes are interpreted here as inquiriesassuming the shape of subversive and transformative socialcriticism: immanent critique. Immanent critique aims at shiftinghorizons of meaning in social contexts, and the philosopherspracticing this kind of social criticism understand themselves asphysicians of a failing society. In Thucydides’ work, a particularobject of criticism is formed by varying dominant social and moralordering principles. In the Mytilenean Debate, it is the principle ofexpediency (τò ξυ ́μφορον) that rules, whereas in the MelianDialogue the governing normative ordering principle is that ofsafety and survival (σωτηρíα). In each episode, a contendingperspective is introduced for the purpose of undermining thedominating principle
Critical theory · Criticism · Epistemology · Focus (optics · Meaning (existential · Normative · Object (grammar · Perspective (graphical · Political science · Politics · Social criticism · Sociology · Transformative learning · Classical Philosophy and Thought · Law · Philosophy
| Citation velocity | historical |
|---|---|
| Highly cited | No |