Lorenzo Girardi

This article sheds light on the relation between care for the soul and the political thought of Jan Patočka. Patočka often sketches a connection between care for the soul and a theory of the state, but he rarely elaborates this. The biographical fact of Patočka’s own political dissidence and his interpretation of care for the soul as a distancing from traditional structures of society have caused many to look at Patočka’s political thought mainly through the lens of political resistance. Such interpretations are definitely warranted, but can overlook the moments in his work that point towards a theory of the state. While these are only indications, this article presents a way to develop these moments. It will do so on the basis of the idea that the theory of the state should not be based directly on care for the soul itself, but on its founding principle of problematicity. The stronger, perhaps more metaphysical, interpretation of problematicity that is argued for here both opens the space of the political and sets strict boundaries to it and as such should be the founding principle of any state that wishes to uphold this space.

The debate between speculative realism and phenomenology has become quite heated over the past years. The matter of contention is the possibility of a metaphysics that can provide knowledge of reality as it is in itself. The speculative realists accuse phenomenology of denying this possibility, confining knowledge to the sphere of subjectivity. What has been overlooked in this debate is the similarity between the speculative project of Quentin Meillassoux and a Husserlian metaphysics. This article looks at these positions from a reconciliatory point of view. After outlining the debate, conceding the problematic nature of realism for phenomenology to the speculative realists, it will be shown that there is a place for a realist metaphysics within phenomenology. After showing the similarities between Meillassoux’s philosophy and a phenomenological metaphysics, and the legitimacy of qualifying the latter as a speculative realism, the conclusion will reflect on the modal notions at play in them.

In een rechtsstaat is de macht van de meerderheid niet onbeperkt, schrijft Lorenzo Girardi. Wat in een dergelijke samenleving wordt toegestaan, is volgens hem dus niet het resultaat van de dominante cultuur, zoals Paul Bordewijk eerder schreef, maar van principes die cultuur overstijgen. Een ‘kritische afstand ten aanzien van de eigen cultuur’ is daarbij essentieel.