Volume 21, Issue 1

In this paper, it is argued that even though the concept of community does not play a significant role in Marxist theory, Marxism needs a notion of community, and the paper sets out to theorize how to make sense of this concept in a Marxist theoretical setting. The paper claims that Althusser’s philosophy, especially his elaboration of the concept of practice, may assist us in this task, and it sets out to explore what can be gained by redefining community in terms of practice. In Althusser’s theory, practice and ideology are very closely linked. While recognizing the importance of Althusser’s theory of ideology, the paper then subsequently explores an alternative configuration of the concepts community and ideology. Finally, it is claimed that this analysis may help us to better understand ideologies such as racism and nationalism.

In recent attempts to define “harm,” comparative accounts of harm, specifically counterfactual comparative accounts, have been touted as the most promising approaches to defining the concept. Nevertheless, such accounts face serious difficulties. This has led to the call for the concept to simply be dropped from the moral lexicon altogether. I reject this call, arguing that non-comparative approaches to defining harm have not been sufficiently explored. I develop such an account and claim that it avoids the difficulties faced by comparative accounts while not presupposing a substantive theory of well-being, which is taken as a key failing of non-comparative accounts. I conclude that this definition renders a concept of harm that can be meaningfully employed in our moral discourse.

I argue that given a plausible reading of John Williams’s Stoner (2012 [1965]) the novel throws light on the demands and costs of pursuing a strategy for self-realisation along Platonic lines which seeks unification through the adoption of a single exclusive end in a manner that emulates the Socratic maieutic teacher. The novel does not explicitly argue either for or against such a strategy but rather vividly depicts its difficulties, appeal, and limitations, thus leaving the ultimate evaluation up to the reader.

The aim of this article is to look at the discussion of the singularity in Jean-Luc Nancy’s philosophy as a quest to imagine a new concept of a common existence that negates the differentiation between “I” and the “other.” In the age of subjectivity, the main indicator of existence is the “subjectivity” that differs from the contingency and perceives itself as a whole in its autonomous singularity. This singularity-centralized perception of existence causes the negation of the being of the otherness and its ethical being that is the core element of establishing the subjectivity. Nancy, one of the leading philosophers offering new approaches on ethical subjectivity, tries to reflect upon a new idea about community (which is called in Nancy’s philosophy “being-in-common”), where the subjects can open themselves to the otherness. This article aims to claim that the idea of “being-in-common” is the only ethical opportunity to overcome the crisis that results from the sense of existence reduced to subjectivity. In Nancy’s thought, the ethical possibility of being-in-common should be interiorized within the concept of a communist democracy. A communist democracy is an opening of the being to its perfectibility in which the otherness is ontologically placed within the idea of the community.