What do you think?
Rate this book
Critique and Praxis
Critical philosophy has always challenged the division between theory and practice. At its best, it aims to turn contemplation into emancipation, seeking to transform society in pursuit of equality, autonomy, and human flourishing. Yet today's critical theory often seems to engage only in critique. These times of crisis demand more.
Bernard E. Harcourt challenges us to move beyond decades of philosophical detours and to harness critical thought to the need for action. In a time of increasing awareness of economic and social inequality, Harcourt calls on us to make society more equal and just. Only critical theory can guide us toward a more self-reflexive pursuit of justice. Charting a vision for political action and social transformation, Harcourt argues that instead of posing the question, "What is to be done?" we must now turn it back onto ourselves and ask, and answer, "What more am I to do?"
Critique and Praxis advocates for a new path forward that constantly challenges each and every one of us to ask what more we can do to realize a society based on equality and justice. Joining his decades of activism, social-justice litigation, and political engagement with his years of critical theory and philosophical work, Harcourt has written a magnum opus.
Bernard E. Harcourt challenges us to move beyond decades of philosophical detours and to harness critical thought to the need for action. In a time of increasing awareness of economic and social inequality, Harcourt calls on us to make society more equal and just. Only critical theory can guide us toward a more self-reflexive pursuit of justice. Charting a vision for political action and social transformation, Harcourt argues that instead of posing the question, "What is to be done?" we must now turn it back onto ourselves and ask, and answer, "What more am I to do?"
Critique and Praxis advocates for a new path forward that constantly challenges each and every one of us to ask what more we can do to realize a society based on equality and justice. Joining his decades of activism, social-justice litigation, and political engagement with his years of critical theory and philosophical work, Harcourt has written a magnum opus.
- GenresPhilosophyNonfiction
696 pages, Hardcover
First published August 11, 2020
21 people are currently reading
219 people want to read
About the author
Bernard E. Harcourt
23 books72 followersBernard Harcourt is the Julius Kreeger Professor of Law & Criminology and Chair and Professor of Political Science at The University of Chicago.
Professor Harcourt's scholarship intersects social and political theory, the sociology of punishment, criminal law and procedure, and criminology. He is the author of Against Prediction: Punishing and Policing in an Actuarial Age (University of Chicago Press 2007), Language of the Gun: Youth, Crime, and Public Policy (University of Chicago Press 2005), and Illusion of Order: The False Promise of Broken-Windows Policing (Harvard University Press 2001). Harcourt is also the coauthor of Criminal Law and the Regulation of Vice (Thompson West 2007), the editor of Guns, Crime, and Punishment in America (New York University Press 2003), and the founder and editor of the journal Carceral Notebooks.
Professor Harcourt earned his bachelor's degree in political theory at Princeton University, his law degree at Harvard Law School, and his PhD in political science at Harvard University. After law school, Professor Harcourt clerked for the Hon. Charles S. Haight Jr. of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York and then worked as an attorney at the Equal Justice Initiative in Montgomery, Alabama, representing death row inmates. Professor Harcourt continues to represent death row inmates pro bono, and has also served on human rights missions in South Africa and Guatemala.
Professor Harcourt has been a visiting professor at Harvard University, New York University, the École des Hautes Études en Sciences Sociales, Université Paris X–Nanterre, and Université Paul Cézanne Aix-Marseille III, and was previously on the faculty at the University of Arizona.
Education:
AB ,1984, Princeton University; JD, 1989, and PhD, 2000, Harvard University
Professor Harcourt's scholarship intersects social and political theory, the sociology of punishment, criminal law and procedure, and criminology. He is the author of Against Prediction: Punishing and Policing in an Actuarial Age (University of Chicago Press 2007), Language of the Gun: Youth, Crime, and Public Policy (University of Chicago Press 2005), and Illusion of Order: The False Promise of Broken-Windows Policing (Harvard University Press 2001). Harcourt is also the coauthor of Criminal Law and the Regulation of Vice (Thompson West 2007), the editor of Guns, Crime, and Punishment in America (New York University Press 2003), and the founder and editor of the journal Carceral Notebooks.
Professor Harcourt earned his bachelor's degree in political theory at Princeton University, his law degree at Harvard Law School, and his PhD in political science at Harvard University. After law school, Professor Harcourt clerked for the Hon. Charles S. Haight Jr. of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York and then worked as an attorney at the Equal Justice Initiative in Montgomery, Alabama, representing death row inmates. Professor Harcourt continues to represent death row inmates pro bono, and has also served on human rights missions in South Africa and Guatemala.
Professor Harcourt has been a visiting professor at Harvard University, New York University, the École des Hautes Études en Sciences Sociales, Université Paris X–Nanterre, and Université Paul Cézanne Aix-Marseille III, and was previously on the faculty at the University of Arizona.
Education:
AB ,1984, Princeton University; JD, 1989, and PhD, 2000, Harvard University
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews
May 9, 2020
Critique and Praxis from Bernard E Harcourt is a work that I will likely come back to many more times. Thought-provoking in a way that far too few books are, namely, toward making us as individuals and us as a society better, and where those acts should come together.
At the heart of the book is Harcourt's assertion that the question we must ask ourselves is not a collective "What is to be done?" but rather a personal "What more am I to do?" In formulating this viewpoint he walks us through the history of critical philosophy with an eye toward the inherent conflicts that gradually (or maybe not so gradually) turned a philosophy intent on changing the world for the better into a philosophy intent on arguing about what would be the best ways to understand (and maybe) change the world.
I think most readers who will be interested in this book have an idea of what they perceive critical philosophy to be and how best to bring theory and practice together. Yet it is the very idea of theory and practice being separate and distinct that Harcourt debates, making a case for more of a "field effect" where they collide and there is no real separation between them, they are always affecting each other.
One of the reasons I will be revisiting this book many more times is that I have not fully wrapped my mind around the difference between doing theoretical work, then applying that to action I can take, then doing more theoretical work, then, well, on and on. Very similar to what Foucault advocated. I'm not sure of where my cycles and Harcourt's always already colliding field effect differ. Though I do think that one difference is that he does not, if applied as he puts forth, argue for what others should do, only what he must do. But isn't sharing what others maybe should do helpful? Isn't that similar to the idea of standing on the shoulders of others to reach higher?
Aside from confronting the reader about how to do critical philosophy, the history of the area is sufficient reason to make this required reading. His overview along with his commentary and questions gives the reader no choice but to actively engage with this history, not simply take it in passively.
The last section, and particularly the last chapter, Harcourt mentions he considered leaving out. I am so thankful he didn't. I found the last chapter as chilling and accurate a statement of many of the ills of today's society as any I've read. If this last chapter isn't enough to make readers do something, whether a close adoption of Harcourt's approach or any approach that includes immediate action, then I don't know what will.
I highly recommend this book to those familiar with critical philosophy. The more you've read of the foundational texts the easier this volume will be to read. That said, Harcourt does a very good job of summarizing early works and someone with a casual background will, I think, still get quite a lot from the ideas. It will also offer some pointers on what to read if you are just getting into the topic. While not a particularly difficult read it is dense and assumes that the reader has some knowledge of many other thinkers in the area. I am not an expert in this area and while I have read most of the works analyzed, my thinking is not that of a professional or academic, so that will give you some guide to understanding what I took away from the book as well as what I might have misunderstood. Thus many more readings for me.
Reviewed from a copy made available by the publisher via NetGalley.
At the heart of the book is Harcourt's assertion that the question we must ask ourselves is not a collective "What is to be done?" but rather a personal "What more am I to do?" In formulating this viewpoint he walks us through the history of critical philosophy with an eye toward the inherent conflicts that gradually (or maybe not so gradually) turned a philosophy intent on changing the world for the better into a philosophy intent on arguing about what would be the best ways to understand (and maybe) change the world.
I think most readers who will be interested in this book have an idea of what they perceive critical philosophy to be and how best to bring theory and practice together. Yet it is the very idea of theory and practice being separate and distinct that Harcourt debates, making a case for more of a "field effect" where they collide and there is no real separation between them, they are always affecting each other.
One of the reasons I will be revisiting this book many more times is that I have not fully wrapped my mind around the difference between doing theoretical work, then applying that to action I can take, then doing more theoretical work, then, well, on and on. Very similar to what Foucault advocated. I'm not sure of where my cycles and Harcourt's always already colliding field effect differ. Though I do think that one difference is that he does not, if applied as he puts forth, argue for what others should do, only what he must do. But isn't sharing what others maybe should do helpful? Isn't that similar to the idea of standing on the shoulders of others to reach higher?
Aside from confronting the reader about how to do critical philosophy, the history of the area is sufficient reason to make this required reading. His overview along with his commentary and questions gives the reader no choice but to actively engage with this history, not simply take it in passively.
The last section, and particularly the last chapter, Harcourt mentions he considered leaving out. I am so thankful he didn't. I found the last chapter as chilling and accurate a statement of many of the ills of today's society as any I've read. If this last chapter isn't enough to make readers do something, whether a close adoption of Harcourt's approach or any approach that includes immediate action, then I don't know what will.
I highly recommend this book to those familiar with critical philosophy. The more you've read of the foundational texts the easier this volume will be to read. That said, Harcourt does a very good job of summarizing early works and someone with a casual background will, I think, still get quite a lot from the ideas. It will also offer some pointers on what to read if you are just getting into the topic. While not a particularly difficult read it is dense and assumes that the reader has some knowledge of many other thinkers in the area. I am not an expert in this area and while I have read most of the works analyzed, my thinking is not that of a professional or academic, so that will give you some guide to understanding what I took away from the book as well as what I might have misunderstood. Thus many more readings for me.
Reviewed from a copy made available by the publisher via NetGalley.
December 6, 2020
six stars
August 14, 2020
Excellent overview of critical theory with a valuable personal discussion of praxis.
June 26, 2021
I’ll reread this and possibly teach it. I bet I bump it to five at that point.
November 19, 2025
What more am I to do?
That is the question posed throughout the book in a myriad of meaningful ways. While the text does not offer a clear cut answer as any lost or hopeless radical might seek, it does offer a new framework by which you can analyze and reflect on what you personally believe can be done, as well as what you might want to consider along your way to formulating that ever changing goal.
At several points I was reminded of illusions we take for granted - how at a foundational level there exists veils to unmask. Some pertaining to law I hadn't fully considered.
It's a long book and covers plenty of concepts, but if you're interested in the history of modern critique and its clash against praxis, it is a must read.
That is the question posed throughout the book in a myriad of meaningful ways. While the text does not offer a clear cut answer as any lost or hopeless radical might seek, it does offer a new framework by which you can analyze and reflect on what you personally believe can be done, as well as what you might want to consider along your way to formulating that ever changing goal.
At several points I was reminded of illusions we take for granted - how at a foundational level there exists veils to unmask. Some pertaining to law I hadn't fully considered.
It's a long book and covers plenty of concepts, but if you're interested in the history of modern critique and its clash against praxis, it is a must read.
January 5, 2025
he is excellent on foucault, but i was unpersuaded by/unsympathetic towards some of his ideological-political statements, and further, his approbation of contemporary critics w/o much evidence. later he reveals the extent of his work against the death penalty / for people on death row. so he is something of a saint.
December 18, 2024
A true textbook on critical theory, read unguided at your own peril
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews