Read more
'Criticism of Giorgio Agamben's work has tended to denigrate, or apologise for, its political dimensions. Where others have tried to isolate the 'political' in the homo sacer series, Mathew Abbott offers a brilliantly original reading of political ontology as the crux of Agamben's work. Indispensable for anyone interested in Agamben, and contemporary continental thought more generally.' Alex Murray, University of Exeter A fundamental re-reading of Agamben that defends and develops his philosophy as post-Heideggerian political ontology Mathew Abbott argues that Agamben's thought is misunderstood when read in terms of critical theory or traditional political philosophy, and shows it should instead be understood as engaging in political ontology: the study of the political stakes of the question of being. Abbott demonstrates the crucial influence of Martin Heidegger on Agamben's work, locating it in the post-Heideggerian tradition of the critique of metaphysics. He also positions it in relation to the thought of Benjamin, Nietzsche, Levinas, Nancy and Wittgenstein. As he clarifies Agamben's philosophy, links are made with Wittgenstein's picture theory and Heidegger's concept of the world-picture, showing the importance of this for understanding - and potentially overcoming - the forms of alienation characteristic of the society of the spectacle. Mathew Abbott is a Lecturer in Philosophy at the Federation University Australia. [Note change to credit line] Cover image: Embrace, Paul Klee, 1939 (c) bpk/Sprengel Museum Hannover/Michael Herling/Aline Gwose. Cover design: [EUP logo] www.euppublishing.com
About the author
Mathew Abbott is Lecturer in Philosophy at Federation University Australia. He completed his PhD at in philosophy at the University of Sydney. He has taught philosophy, film, aesthetics and poetry at Sydney, the Australian National University and the University of Canberra. He researches modern European philosophy, political philosophy, critical theory and aesthetics.
Summary
Mathew Abbott argues that Agamben's thought is misunderstood when read in terms of critical theory or traditional political philosophy. He shows instead that it engages in political ontology: studying the political stakes of the question of being.
