Simon Susen

Bio: Simon Susen is an academic researcher from City University London. The author has contributed to research in topics: Critical theory & Social theory. The author has an hindex of 22, co-authored 98 publications receiving 1561 citations. Previous affiliations of Simon Susen include Birkbeck, University of London & Newcastle University.

Is There Such a Thing as a ‘Pragmatic Sociology of Critique’? Reflections on Luc Boltanski's On Critique

Abstract: This chapter provides an in-depth discussion of Luc Boltanski’s 'On Critique: A Sociology of Emancipation'. On the basis of a detailed textual analysis of what may be regarded as Boltanski’s most philosophical study, this contribution offers a fine-grained account of the strengths and weaknesses of his ‘pragmatic sociology of critique’. The chapter is divided into two parts. The first part examines five significant strengths of On Critique: (1) its engagement with the normative tasks of critical theory; (2) its insights into the structuring function of institutions; (3) its emphasis on the justificatory role of critique; (4) its concern with the adaptable nature of domination; and (5) its insistence upon the empowering potential of emancipation. Following the thematic structure of the previous investigation, the second part reflects upon the flaws and limitations of On Critique: (1) its failure to identify solid normative foundations for critical theory; (2) its terminologically imprecise, analytically short-sighted, and insufficiently differentiated conception of institutions; (3) its unsystematic approach to the multilayered relationship between ordinary and scientific forms of critique; (4) its lack of attention to the polycentric constitution of power relations in highly differentiated societies; and (5) its reductive understanding of human emancipation.

Une sociologie pragmatique de la critique est-elle possible? Quelques réflexions sur « De la critique » de Luc Boltanski

Abstract: The main purpose of this article is to provide an in - depth discu ssion of Luc Boltanski’s On Critique: A Sociology of Emancipation . On the basis of a detailed textual analysis of this book, the paper offers a fine - grained account of the strengths and weaknesses of Boltanski’s «pragmatic sociology of critique». The study is divided into two parts. The first part examines five signi - ficant strengths o f On Critique : (1) its engagement with the normative tasks of critical theory ; (2) its insights into the structuring function of institutions ; (3) its emphasis on the justificatory role of critique ; (4) its concern with the adaptable nature of domination ; and (5) its insistence upon the empowering potential of emancipation . Following the thematic structure of the previous investigation, the second part reflects upon the flaws and limitations of On Critique : (1) its failure to provide solid normative foundat ions for critical theory; (2) its terminologically imprecise, analytically short - sighted, and insufficiently differentiated conception of institutions; (3) its unsystematic approach to the multi - layered relationship between ordinary and scientific forms of critique; (4) its lack of attention to the polycentric constitution of power relations in highly differentiated societies; and (5) its reductive understanding of human emancipation.

Further Reflections on the “Postmodern Turn” in the Social Sciences: A Reply to William Outhwaite

Abstract: I am immensely grateful to William Outhwaite for commenting on my book The ‘Postmodern Turn’ in the Social Sciences (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2015). I should stress at the outset that I agree with most of the points he makes in his commentary, which I find very insightful, thought-provoking, and constructive. Hence, any reader expecting to be entertained by a cockfight between book author and book reviewer will be disappointed. Let me take this opportunity to reflect on some of the main issues raised in Outhwaite’s inspiring review.

The Philosophical Significance of Binary Categories in Habermas’s Discourse Ethics

Abstract: The philosophical programme associated with the discourse ethics of Jurgen Habermas has been widely discussed in the literature. The fact that Habermas has devoted a considerable part of his work to the elaboration of this philosophical programme indicates that discourse ethics can be regarded as a cornerstone of his communication-theoretic approach to society. In essence, Habermas conceives of discourse ethics as a philosophical framework which derives the coordinative power of social normativity from the discursive power of communicative rationality. Although there is an extensive literature on Habermas’s communication-theoretic account of society, almost no attention has been paid to the fact that the theoretical framework which undergirds his discourse ethics is based on a number of binary conceptual divisions. It is the purpose of this paper to shed light on the philosophical significance of these binary categories in Habermas’s discourse ethics and thereby demonstrate that their complexity is indicative of the subject’s tension-laden immersion in social reality.

Habits of the Heart: Individualism and Commitment in American Life

Abstract: Meanwhile, the authors' antidote to the American sicknessa quest for democratic community that draws on our diverse civic and religious traditionshas contributed to a vigorous scholarly and popular debate. Attention has been focused on forms of social organization, be it civil society, democratic communitarianism, or associative democracy, that can humanize the market and the administrative state. In their new Introduction the authors relate the argument of their book both to the current realities of American society and to the growing debate about the country's future. With this new edition one of the most influential books of recent times takes on a new immediacy.\

Can the Subaltern Speak

Abstract: In the present paper a research has been done on the essay ‘Can the Subaltern Speak’ by’ Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak’. It has been explained into much simpler language about what the author conveys for better understanding and further references. Also the criticism has been done by various critiques from various sources which is helpful from examination point of view. The paper has been divided into various contexts with an introduction and the conclusions. Also the references has been written that depicts the sources of criticism.