| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
179287
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This paper explores a “public gathering” which took place every evening from 1991 to 2017 in Victory Square (Shengli guangchang 胜利广场), a public square in Tianjin. The essay opens with an analysis of the type of publicness that stems from the way participants “do things together.” It then describes how a specific public realm appears through the way participants “talk together.” It finally suggests that even if they are overrun with doubt, indeterminacy and anxiety, or embedded in a specific distance-based sociality, the conversations on Victory Square are not a minor, secondary activity. On the contrary, they take place on a common stage where participants interact with one another, reveal themselves as unique individuals and discuss their everyday affairs and common practices. Grasped as an “intermediary public sphere,” this type of gathering engenders and reinforces not only shared meanings and evaluations but also practical knowledge whose validity goes beyond this situated gathering.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
139476
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Conflicting global narratives on good or right living, based on conflicting truth-claims, can often lead to violence.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
086149
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2008.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This article applies E. H. Carr's analysis of utopia and reality, and a Searlean-constructivist analysis of rules and norms, to the concept of 'sovereignty' in general, and Stephen Krasner's argument in Sovereignty: Organized Hypocrisy in particular. In doing this, the article charts a theoretical space that incorporates insights from classical realism, scientific realism, and philosophical (social) constructivism. To view 'utopia' and 'reality' as distinct yet equally important planes of International Relations (IR) inquiry, thereby treating 'sovereignty' as a single concept with descriptive and normative elements, highlights both the merits and the shortcomings of Krasner's approach. Furthermore, this type of analysis suggests a fruitful way to continue a contemporary normative discussion about what sovereign entities ought to do.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|