Home

Common Knowledge

Publisher:
Duke University Press
ISSN:
0961-754X
Scimago Journal Rank:
13
journal article
LitStream Collection
On Cultivation (2002, 2023)

Davis, Natalie Zemon; Perl, Jeffrey M.

2024 Common Knowledge

doi: 10.1215/0961754x-11236621

Half of this piece appeared under the title “Postscript on Cultivation: Editorial Note” in Common Knowledge 8, no. 2 (spring 2002), and half was written in 2023 by one of the coauthors as a posthumous tribute to the other. The historian Natalie Zemon Davis died on the fourteenth day of the latest war between Hamas and Israel in Gaza. The relevance of “Postscript,” which was written following the attacks by al‐Qaeda in the United States on September 11, 2001, is that it redirects the attention of scholars from the battlefield and mass media to the ivory towers in which intellectuals are sometimes said to hide. Cultivated civilians ought to know that cultures strive to erase one another in ways vile but unsurprising. Those who learn history expect atrocity and should busy themselves less with assignment of blame than with archaeology, the preservation of objects, the collection of reports and stories, and the reinforcement — by retiring from the streets into libraries and other spaces of patient cooperation — of the partition between barbarism and civilization. With reference to the religious wars of the sixteenth century, during which — Davis showed in a famous essay — Catholics and Protestants fought each other by day but met by night to collect and distribute alms, Perl commends the urge to withdraw from both combat and protest into institutions doing good works quietly.
journal article
LitStream Collection
Julian of Norwich's Hazelnut as Paradox

Bynum, Caroline Walker

2024 Common Knowledge

doi: 10.1215/0961754x-11236636

Using historical rather than philosophical means, this essay responds to a philosophical discussion of the problem of evil. Instead of constructing arguments in support of a general, theoretical position, the author examines a single, paradoxical image from the vision of a medieval anchoress and suggests that those concerned with the problem of evil, including philosophers, should take it seriously. In order to explain or contextualize why, despite the existence of evil, “all will be well . . . and all manner of thing will be well,” Julian of Norwich narrates how, in her vision, God placed in her hand “something small, no bigger than a hazelnut,” which is both contingent and eternal, all and nothing — opposites coexisting. This essay analyzes how Julian's image of the hazelnut as paradoxical is a simultaneity of opposites and argues that paradox, enacted and experienced in ritual, offers a way to assert and live with opposites such as good and evil, life and death, simultaneously.
journal article
LitStream Collection
The Sovereignty of ChanceCan Lottery Save Democracy?

Urbinati, Nadia

2024 Common Knowledge

doi: 10.1215/0961754x-11236649

In the context of the ongoing Common Knowledge symposium “Antipolitics,” this article responds skeptically to the numerous contributions calling for the supplanting of elections by sortition. While lottocracy is proposed as a solution to the flaws of electoral democracy — notably, corruption and violent partisanship — this response focuses on a single theoretical issue: the logic of chance or randomness, which, according to its proponents, should rid politics of corruption and relieve representation of partisanship so as to ultimately prevent the formation of a ruling class separate from the rest of society. The problem with the solution, according to this essay, is that, however useful in many ways, the lottery system of lawmaking is not democratic.
journal article
LitStream Collection
The Democratic Pedigree of Random SelectionA Response to Nadia Urbinati

Gastil, John

2024 Common Knowledge

doi: 10.1215/0961754x-11236662

As part of the ongoing Common Knowledge symposium “Antipolitics,” this essay replies to an article by Nadia Urbinati: “The Sovereignty of Chance: Can Lottery Save Democracy?” Urbinati's piece expresses reservations about the tendency of symposium contributions to support what she terms “lottocracy.” Gastil's response argues (1) that random selection in politics can take many forms, none of which need resemble a lottocracy; (2) that a randomly selected body with some measure of influence or authority can complement electoral democracy without replacing it; (3) that prohibiting democracies from experimenting with random selection would undermine their claim to being democratic; and (4) that evidence from experience with random selection warrants continuing to experiment with it as a means of revitalizing imperiled democratic systems.
Articles per page
Browse All Journals

Related Journals: