The Imaginary Institution of Society

The Imaginary Institution of Society❴Reading❵ ➾ The Imaginary Institution of Society Author Cornelius Castoriadis – Heartforum.co.uk This is one of the most original and important works of contemporaryEuropean thought First published in France in , it is the major theoretical work of one of the foremost thinkers in Europe todayThis This is Institution of PDF/EPUB Á one of the most original and important works of contemporaryEuropean thought First published in France in , it is the major theoretical work of one of the foremost thinkers in Europe todayThis is one of the most original and important works of contemporary European thought First published in France in , it is the major theoretical work of one of the foremost thinkers in Europe todayCastoriadis offers a brilliant and far reaching analysis of the unique character of the social historical world and its relations to the individual, to language, and The Imaginary PDF or to nature He argues that most traditional conceptions of society and history overlook the essential feature of the social historical world, namely that this world is not articulated once and for all but is in each case the creation of the society concerned In emphasizing the element of creativity, Castoriadis opens the way for rethinking political theory and practice in terms of the autonomous and explicit self institution of society.

Cornelius Castoriadis Institution of PDF/EPUB Á Greek was a Greek philosopher, social critic, economist, psychoanalyst, author of The Imaginary Institution of Society, and co founder of the Socialisme ou Barbarie groupEdgar Morin proposed that Castoriadis work will be remembered for its remarkable continuity and coherence as well as for its extraordinary breadth which was encyclopaedic in the original Greek sense, for it offered us a paideia, or education, that brought full circle our cycle of otherwise compartmentalized knowledge in the arts and sciences Castoriadis wrote essays on mathematics, physics, biology, anthropology, psychoanalysis, linguistics, society, economics, politics, philosophy, The Imaginary PDF or and artOne of Castoriadis many important contributions to social theory was the idea that social change involves radical discontinuities that cannot be understood in terms of any determinate causes or presented as a sequence of events Change emerges through the social imaginary without determinations, but in order to be socially recognized must be instituted as revolution Any knowledge of society and social change can exist only by referring to, or by positing, singular entities which figure and presentify social imaginary significations Castoriadis used traditional terms as much as possible, though consistently redefining them Further, Imaginary Institution of MOBI î some of his terminology changed throughout the later part of his career, with the terms gaining greater consistency but breaking from their traditional meaning neologisms When reading Castoriadis, it is helpful to understand what he means by the terms he uses, since he does not redefine the terms in every piece where he employs them Castoriadis has influenced European especially continental thought in important ways His interventions in sociological and political theory have resulted in some of the most well known writing to emerge from the continent especially in the figure of J rgen Habermas, who often can be seen to be writing against Castoriadis Hans Joas published a number of articles in American journals in order to highlight the importance of Castoriadis work to a North American sociological audience, and the enduring importance of Johann P Arnason, both for his critical engagement with Castoriadis thought, but also for his sustained efforts to introduce Castoriadis thought to the English speaking public especially during his editorship of the journal Thesis Eleven must also be noted In the last few years, there has been growing interest in Castoriadis s thought, including the publication of two monographs authored by Arnason s former students Jeff Klooger s Castoriadis Psyche, Society, Autonomy Brill , and Suzi Adams s Castoriadis s Ontology Being and Creation Fordham University Press.

The Imaginary Institution of Society ePUB º The
    Import EPUB to the Program Import EPUB of society and history overlook the essential feature of the social historical world, namely that this world is not articulated once and for all but is in each case the creation of the society concerned In emphasizing the element of creativity, Castoriadis opens the way for rethinking political theory and practice in terms of the autonomous and explicit self institution of society."/>
  • Paperback
  • 418 pages
  • The Imaginary Institution of Society
  • Cornelius Castoriadis
  • English
  • 23 August 2017
  • 0262531550

10 thoughts on “The Imaginary Institution of Society

  1. stephen says:

    to really work with this you have to work Otherwise.a fascinating and difficult work that i have spent far too much time with or so it seems at moments it remains a complete mystery to me why this is not very widely read the implications of castoriadis social ontology are quite radical and have yet to be really explored most of the work out there on him turns round and round at the level of traditional academic commentary, which is as it always is sometimes useful, occasionally inspiring, to really work with this you have to work Otherwise.a fascinating and difficult work that i have spent far too much time with or so it seems at moments it remains a complete mystery to me why this is not very widely read the implications of castoriadis social ontology are quite radical and have yet to be really explored most of the work out there on him turns round and round at the level of traditional academic commentary, which is as it always is sometimes useful, occasionally inspiring, mostly blah blah blah but almost all of it across the useful and otherwise operates within registers of thinking and or representation that are subjected to systematic critique within the work itself so perhaps the above is no surprise.it seems particularly stupid to assign stuff like this these little stars yay castoriadis i like it yay merleau ponty what fun i like husserl and harry potter the same amount and in the same way blech.blech blech blech

  2. Alex Lee says:

    This is probably as close as you can get to Deleuze and Guattari D G s books Thousand Plateaus or Anti Oedipus without really invoking the same aesthetic Castoriadis is able to present his ideas well, although he has a tendency to ramble He carries on with a basis in psychoanalysis in order to present the underbelly of social arrangements, an understanding of the shadow construction of ideology founded on only teleological impetus.Some of his text is perhaps not needed though, as he does r This is probably as close as you can get to Deleuze and Guattari DG s books Thousand Plateaus or Anti Oedipus without really invoking the same aesthetic Castoriadis is able to present his ideas well, although he has a tendency to ramble He carries on with a basis in psychoanalysis in order to present the underbelly of social arrangements, an understanding of the shadow construction of ideology founded on only teleological impetus.Some of his text is perhaps not needed though, as he does ramble Different from DG Castoriadis seeks to illuminate the nature of reason and logic within our construction for social consistency in the manner of academics which is fine in the sense that this is where the ideas are generated but by holding onto that academic position, he doesn t present a full synthesis of his ideas The next step would be to adopt a platform in which the ideological basis for generation does not come from this privileged position of sublimation He would have to have an aesthetic that reflects the differentials inherent within the discourses he seeks to illuminate this doesn t mean that he could only write as DG did, but it would mean that he would have to be radically aware of where he speaks from and the manner by which his process of elucidation comes to refy itself as part of this imaginary institution of society.Part of his incomplete basis lies with his psychoanalytic insistence of imaginary Since he has written there have been alternate positions of imaginary, besides Freud Lacan of which Le Doeuff shows ties in with the supplementary nature of what Castoriadis calls Legein namely Derrida deconstruction, Baudrillard simulacra s void so there are other positions other than psychoanalysis In fact, Castoriadis adopts a supervenience view on the imaginary, grounding society within the hook of subjectivity so that what makes our identity would also create our own sense of social institutions stability This view is problematic for while Castoriadis notes that this is grounded on nothing being only for itself and therefore imaginary he provides the generative mechanicism of this cyclical return through psychoanalytic drives in that sense while identity may be grounded on nothing, it is generative on a drive that is also incomplete and missing He is trading one lack for another lack, forming the groundwork of the petit object a from this, falling into the same binding logic of Zizek although Zizek goes from Lacan and Althusser into critical studies in this manner This proves problematic because Castoriadis s real target is logical identity itself Society as an imaginary institution is only a secondary affect of the ungrounding of identity What Castriadis has really shown is that our sense of being is not supplemented by what we think it is supplement rather it is formulated by the latent content that has cohered around the formulation of our innate drive states Despite the fact that many other philosophers have walked this trail, Castoriadis presents this view as being imaginary without giving us a sense of what Real is only as the excess of the imaginary We are left in our Kantian bubble, a teleological explanation that calibrates our own subjectivity in the manner of Descartes although Castoriadis takes Descartes down as well, as it is not a manner of thinking but what supplements thinking so that Castoriadis is left with a bubble that wraps in on itself, composed of meaningless phonemes At once, he wishes to build our view from smaller logical parts the supervenience all the while insisting that this emerging logic is not real because it is not found from the smaller parts In other words, Castoriadis challenges Descartes on the content of his I think therefore I am but insists on utilizing Descartes method as a modality of generating truth He settles in on the unconscious as the logical container of this excessive supervenience analytic but then insists that it is imaginary because it is not consciously determinable This is problematic word play of the worst kind it is the same kind of problem Lacan solved with his moebial strip analogy and Derrida with his differance but Castoriadis does not seem able to jump to this next step, to either adopt a supervenience view only or to examine the for itself as its own internal contradiction.We are instead left with a weakly flickering structure, one that wishes to expand to a maximal explanation but instead is not a revelation of any kind Not only because others have tread this path, but because Castoriadis is unable to resolve the immanent problems with his explanation He does provide plenty of interesting insight, but misses the mathematical fit the modeling Descartes provided through his analytical geometry This methodology provided the path not just for science and math but also characterizes the modality of philosophy as well He cites Plato s analysis of phonemes as being the root of analysis which is close but not quite Because of this, Castoriadis misses the middle part of his thesis, focusing on the big picture real institutions and the small picture analytical supervenience but blindly participates in the same automatic theory generation because that theorizational model is natural to him, unnamed and therefore invisible.His mismapping of institutions, one that uses the unconscious to fill in the void he cannot see, is the problem with this book Additionally Castoriadis could have utilized a historic political economic examination as well, in order to demonstrate how modern institutions arose, but this is not his method He wishes to remain only examining universals, and for that reason, while he is able to point of some key points for society and philosophy he is also unable to tell us what to do with these ideas In this sense, his book is less revelatory than it is merely library taxonomy in trying to draw the longest consistency available given the field of philosophical materialism.I like his attempt, and applaud his effort but his work is deeply flawed for the reasons cited above

  3. Freddie says:

    Cornelius Castoriadis, along with Henri Lefebvre and Andre Gorz, is one of the most under appreciated acknowledged radical thinkers of the 20th century For me the best parts of the book were the Castoriadis exposition of alienation as social heteronomy , of which his notion of autonomy constitutes a central aspect, avoiding the pitfalls ofMarxist humanist conceptions of alienation Also enjoyed the aspects that insisted upon the fundamentally social orientation of autonomy Bit too reli Cornelius Castoriadis, along with Henri Lefebvre and Andre Gorz, is one of the most under appreciated acknowledged radical thinkers of the 20th century For me the best parts of the book were the Castoriadis exposition of alienation as social heteronomy , of which his notion of autonomy constitutes a central aspect, avoiding the pitfalls ofMarxist humanist conceptions of alienation Also enjoyed the aspects that insisted upon the fundamentally social orientation of autonomy Bit too reliant on Freud and Psychoanalysis for my likings his work could certainly be enriched by a dialogue with Schizoanalysis , but the five stars is earned from the humour and honesty throughout the book For me, the most useful aspect of his work is the notion of the imaginary , in which he argues that social reality is but the implementation of imaginary significations I.e representations that mobilise feelings At present, we have an imaginary thoroughly colonised by the irrationality logic of the economy economic growth, as posited by Serge Latouche, that we urgently need to break from are we to avoid further breaching planetary ecological boundaries See Latouche, S Decolonisation of the Imaginary in Degrowth Vocabulary for a New Era 2015, ed D Alisa et al, pp 117 20.My favourite section of the book was Castoriadis randomly, but refreshingly, making the case of autogestion self management and autonomy amidst complex social ontology Reminds me of the early philosophical Marx it resonates the tone of the 1844 manuscripts I desire and I feel the need to live in a society other than the one surrounding me Like most people, I can live in this one and adapt to it at any rate, I do live in it However critically I may try to look at myself, neither my capacity for adaptation, nor my assimilation of reality seems to me to be inferior to the sociological average I am not asking for immortality, ubiquity or omniscience I am not asking society to give me happiness I know that this is not a ration that can be handed out by City Hall or my neighbourhood Workers Council and that, if this thing exists, I have to make it for myself, tailored to my own needs, as this has happened to me already and as this will probably happen to me again In life, however, as it comes to me and to others, I run up against a lot of unacceptable things I say that they are not inevitable and that they stem from the organization of society I desire, and I ask, first of all that my work be meaningful, that I may approve what it is used for and the way in which it is done, that it allow me genuinely to expend myself, to make use of my faculties and at the same time to enrich and develop myself And I say that this is possible, with a different organization of society, possible for me and for everyone I say that it would already be a basic change in this direction if I were allowed to decide, together with everyone else, what I had to do and, with my fellow workers, how to do it.I should like, together with everyone else, to know what is going on in society, to control the extent and the quality of the information I receive I ask to be able to participate directly in all the social decisions that may affect my existence, or the general course of the world in which I live I do not accept the fact that my lot is decided, day after day, by people whose projects are hostile to me or simply unknown to me, and for whom we, that is I and everyone else, are only numbers in a general plan or pawns on a chess board, and that, ultimately, my life and my death are in the hands of people whom I know to be, necessarily, blind I know perfectly well that realizing another social organization, and the life it would imply, would by no means be simple, that difficult problems would arise at every step But I prefer contending with real problems rather than with the consequences of de Gaulle s delirium, Johnson s schemes or Khrushchev s intrigues Even if I and the others should fail along this path, I prefer failure in a meaningful attempt to a state that falls short of either failure or non failure, and which is merely ridiculous I wish to be able to meet the other person as a being like myself and yet absolutely different, not like a number or a frog perched on another level higher or lower, it matters little of the hierarchy of revenues and powers I wish to see the other, and for the other to see me, as another human being I want our relationships to be something other than a field for the expression of aggressivity, our competition to remain within the limits of play, our conflicts to the extent that they cannot be resolved or overcome to concern real problems and real stakes, carrying with them the least amount of unconsciousness possible, and that they be as lightly loaded as possible with the imaginary I want the other to be free, for my freedom begins where the other s freedom begins, and, all alone, I can at best be merely virtuous in misfortune I do not count on people changing into angels, nor on their souls becoming as pure as mountain lakes which, over, I have always found deeply boring But I know how much present culture aggravates and exasperates their difficulty to be and to be with others, and I see that it multiplies to infinity the obstacles placed in the way of their freedom I know, of course, that this desire cannot be realized today nor even were the revolution to take place tomorrow, could it be fully realized in my lifetime I know that one day people will live, for whom the problems that cause us the most anguish today will no longer even exist This is my fate, which I have to assume and which I do assume But this cannot reduce me to despair or to catatonic ruminations Possessing this desire, which indeed is mine, I can only work to realize it And already in the choice of my main interest in life, in the work I devote to it, which for me is meaningful even when I encounter, and accept, partial failure, delays, detours and tasks that have no sense in themselves , in the participation in a group of revolutionaries which is attempting to go beyond the reified and alienated relations of current society I am in a position partially to realize this desire If I had been born in a communist society, would happiness have been easier to attain I really do not know, and at any rate can do nothing about it I am not, under this pretext, going to spend my free time watching television or reading detective novels Does my attitude amount to denying the reality principle But what is the content of this principle Is it that work is necessary or that it is necessary that work be meaningless, exploited, that it contradict the objectives for which it is allegedly done Is this principle valid, in this form, for someone of independent means Is it valid, in this form, for the natives of the Trobriand islands or Samoa Is it still valid today for fishermen in a poor Mediterranean village Up to what point does the reality principle reveal nature, and at what point does it begin to reveal society Why not serfdom, slave galleys, concentration camps Where does a philosophy get the right to tell me here, on exactly this inch of existing institutions, I am going to show you the borderline between the phenomenon and the essence, between passing historical forms and the eternal being of society I accept the reality principle, for I accept the necessity of work as long, in any case, as it is real, for it is becoming less obvious every day and the necessity of a social organization of work But I do not accept the appeal to a false psychoanalysis and to a false metaphysics, which introduces the precise discussion of historical possibilities, gratuitous assertions about alleged impossibilities, about which this philosophy knows nothing at all Might my desire be infantile But the infantile situation is that life is given to you and that the Law is given to you In the infantile situation, life is given to you for nothing and the Law is given to you without anything else, without anything , without any possible discussion What I want is just the opposite I want to make my life and to give life if possible, and in any event to give something for my life I want the Law not to be simply given, but for me to give it to myself at the same time The person who remains constantly in the infantile situation is the conformist and the apolitical person, for they accept the Law without any discussion and do not want to participate in shaping it Someone who lives in society without any will concerning the Law, without any political will, has merely replaced the private father with the anonymous social father The infantile situation is first receiving without giving, and then doing or being in order to receive What I want is a just exchange to begin with, passing beyond exchange afterwards The infantile situation is the relation of duality, the phantasy of fusion and in this sense it is the present society that constantly infantilizes everyone, by the imaginary fusion with unreal entities leaders, nations, cosmonauts or idols What I want is for society to cease to be a family, over a false one and even a grotesque one I want it to acquire its peculiar dimension as a society, a network of relationships among autonomous adults.Is my desire a desire for power But what I want is the abolition of power in the current sense I want the power of each and every one For current power, other people are things, and all that I want goes against this The person for whom others are things is himself a thing, and I do not want to be a thing either for myself or for others I do not want others to be things, I would have no use for this If I may exist for others, be recognized by them, I do not want this to be in terms of the possession of something external to me power nor to exist for them only in an imaginary realm The recognition of others has value to me only inasmuch as I recognize them as well Am I in danger of forgetting all this if ever events were to carry me close to power This seemsthan improbable to me If this were to happen, a battle would perhaps be lost but not the war, and am I to rule my entire life on the assumption that I might one day slip back into childhood Should I follow this chimera of wanting to eliminate the tragic side of human existence It seems to me that instead I want to eliminate the melodramatic aspect, the false tragedy the one in which catastrophe arrives without necessity, in which everything could have been otherwise if only the characters had known this or had done that That people should die of hunger in India, while in America or in Europe governments penalize farmers who over produce this is a macabre farce, this is Grand Guignol in which the cadavres and the suffering are real, but this is not tragedy, there is nothing ineluctable here And if one day humanity perishes by hydrogen bombs, I refuse to call this a tragedy I would call it stupidity I would like an end to Guignol and to the transformation of people into puppets by other puppets who govern them When a neurotic repeats for the 14th time the same behaviour pattern of failure, reproducing for himself and for those nearby the same type of misfortune, helping this person get out of such a situation is to rid his or her life of grotesque farce, not tragedy it is to allow the person finally to see the real problems of life and the tragic element they may contain which the neurosis served in part to express but especially to mask When one of Buddha s disciples came to tell him, after a long voyage in the West, that miraculous things, instruments, medications, methods of thinking and institutions had transformed people s lives since the time the Master had retreated into the mountains, Buddha stopped him after a few words Have they wiped out sadness, sickness, old age and death he asked No, replied the disciple Then, they might as well have kept still, thought the Master And he plunged back into his contemplation, without bothering to show his disciple that he was no longer listening to him

  4. Chelsea Szendi says:

    My basic take away However disenchanted and secular we imagine our world, the rituals and rites we base our rational and secular laws and institutions upon are as magical and mythical as those that came before The myth that they arerational and secular, however, makes their origins evenmysterious than if we just acknowledged their basis in the imaginary.I feel that this work resonates with Horkheimer and Adorno s writing on the dialectic of enlightenment.

  5. Thai Divone says:

    Some interesting insights, but I couldn t get along with the writing style.

  6. Pietro says:

    Normalmente non scrivo commenti sui libri sia perch non possiedo armi di critica se non in maniera superficiale, sia perch ogni libro acquista una vita diversa a seconda del lettore che lo legge un libro morto un libro che non viene pi letto Castoriadis di sicuro un pensatore originale, perci ricco di stimoli per il lettore,in un epoca dove si pensa sempre meno abbiamo se dicenti filosofi che dopo aver scoperto un concetto diventano psicologi o consulenti oppure sociologi, antropol Normalmente non scrivo commenti sui libri sia perch non possiedo armi di critica se non in maniera superficiale, sia perch ogni libro acquista una vita diversa a seconda del lettore che lo legge un libro morto un libro che non viene pi letto Castoriadis di sicuro un pensatore originale, perci ricco di stimoli per il lettore,in un epoca dove si pensa sempre meno abbiamo se dicenti filosofi che dopo aver scoperto un concetto diventano psicologi o consulenti oppure sociologi, antropologi, politici ed, infimamente, giornalisti, che diventano filosofi Spesso e volentieri si dicono cose diverse per essere banalmente uguali Questo signore, che non ha scordato la fatica del pensiero, sembra invece condannato alla damnatio memoriae E il caso di questo libro, che pubblicato a met dovr decidermi leggere la prima parte in lingua straniera , non viene ristampato dalla Bollati Boringhieri anche in versione ridotta La richiesta non manca, stato in cima alle richieste della trasmissione radiofonica Farenheit qualche anno fa, soprattutto in campo accademico Perci non si capisce l atteggiamento delle case editrici visto che pubblicano spesso e volentieri della vera e propria immondizia pompata dalla pubblicit Il libro pressoch introvabile io l ho preso in prestito da una biblioteca pubblica di Bologna Non credo che molti abbiano la mia fortuna

  7. Gabriel Landi says:

    Uma tima cr tica ao materialismo hist rico e ao marxismo, vinda da boca de um socialista, o que por si s tornaria o livro peculiar, n o fosse ainda a proposta da tricotomia Funcional Simb lico Imagin rio, pela qual Castoriadis prop es a vis o da realidade institucional das sociedades humanas.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *