Abstract

Abstract:

Recently, scholars have argued that to ask questions concerning what it may mean to be human is, paradoxically, to engage in an inquiry that is at best, meaningless and at worst, moraline, distracting thinkers from the pursuit of more consequential questions. I argue that the idea of the human remains central to any comprehension of sovereign power. To do so, I present a critical analysis of Erik Santner's work on what he calls "the flesh." Alternatively, I suggest that there are migrations of sovereignty more robust than the masculinist rendering of the flesh that he presents.

pdf

Additional Information

ISSN
1092-311X
Print ISSN
2572-6633
Pages
pp. 939-961
Launched on MUSE
2018-10-26
Open Access
No
Back To Top

This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. Without cookies your experience may not be seamless.