Sustaining Affirmation: The Strengths of Weak Ontology in Political Theory

by Stephen K. White

In light of many recent critiques of Western modernity and its conceptual foundations, the problem of adequately justifying our most basic moral and political values looms large. Without recourse to traditional ontological or metaphysical foundations, how can one affirm--or sustain--a commitment to fundamentals? The answer, according to Stephen White, lies in a turn to "weak" ontology, an approach that allows for ultimate commitments but at the same time acknowledges their historical, contestable character. This turn, White suggests, is already underway. His book traces its emergence in a variety of quarters in political thought today and offers a clear and compelling account of what this might mean for our late modern self-understanding.As he elaborates the idea of weak ontology and the broad criteria behind it, White shows how these are already at work in the thought of contemporary writers of seemingly very different George Kateb, Judith Butler, Charles Taylor, and William Connolly. Among these thinkers, often thought to be at odds, he exposes the commonalities that emerge around the idea of weak ontology. In its identification of a critical turn in political theory, and its nuanced explanation of that turn, his book both demonstrates and underscores the strengths of weak ontology.

Genres: Theory, Philosophy

172 pages, Kindle Edition

First published January 1, 2000

Reviews

[Joseph Sverker · Rating 4 out of 5]

I should really write a substantial review on this one for it informs my PhD in a rather significant way. White presents a very interesting and constructive response to the critique of ontology that has been maintained the last hundred years or so in philosophy. His suggestion is a weak ontology, but that an ontology is indeed needed. The weakness comes in acknowledging the contingency also of our ontologies. It links with Heidegger as the knower being part of the process of knowing, but instead of rejecting metaphysics as onto-theologies White attempts to show how ontologies can be sustained and what categories could be seen as fundamental for a weak ontology. Well worth reading for anyone who wonders about how to respond to Heidegger. It should be said though that Heidegger is not present terribly much in the actual book itself, but instead thinkers such as Charles Taylor and Judith Butler.

[Aureo Toledo · Rating 3 out of 5]

O ponto de partida é bastante promissor, sobretudo a ideia das ontologias fracas. Todavia, o desenvolvimento do argumento é realizado mediante a análise aprofundada de 4 autores, o que deixa o texto hermético e maçante.