The Philosopher and His Poor

The Philosopher and His Poor

Jacques Rancière, Andrew Parker


What has philosophy to do with the bad? If, as has usually been meant, the terrible don't have any time for philosophy, then why have philosophers consistently made time for them? Why is the background of philosophy—from Plato to Karl Marx to Jean-Paul Sartre to Pierre Bourdieu—the historical past of such a lot of figures of the terrible: plebes, males of iron, the demos, artisans, universal humans, proletarians, the loads? Why have philosophers made the shoemaker, particularly, a remarkably ubiquitous presence during this background? Does philosophy itself depend upon this brooding about the negative? if that is so, can it ever chorus from considering for them?

Jacques Rancière’s The thinker and His Poor meditates on those questions in shut readings of significant texts of Western inspiration within which the terrible have performed a number one role—sometimes because the gadgets of philosophical research, occasionally as illustrations of philosophical argument. released in France in 1983 and made to be had right here for the 1st time in English, this consummate examine assesses the results for Marx, Sartre, and Bourdieu of Plato’s admonition that employees should still do “nothing else” than their very own paintings. It deals leading edge readings of those thinkers’ struggles to tricky a philosophy of the terrible. offering a left critique of Bourdieu, the phrases of that are principally unknown to an English-language readership, The thinker and His Poor continues to be remarkably well timed 20 years after its preliminary publication.

Show sample text content

Download sample