BEGIN:VCALENDAR VERSION:2.0 PRODID:-//TYPO3/NONSGML Calendarize//EN BEGIN:VEVENT UID:calendarize-ringvorlesung-mit-em-o-univ-prof-dr-peter-v-zima DTSTAMP:20151016T151508Z DTSTART:20151013T160000Z DTEND:20151013T180000Z SUMMARY:Series of lectures with Em. O. Prof. Dr Peter V. Zima DESCRIPTION:"Subjectivity\, narcissism\, ego idealFor a dialogue model bet ween psychoanalysis and sociology"\n"It should be shown that narcissism ha s two complementary aspects that cannot be separated from each other: a pr oductive aspect that connects the individual with his social environment a nd is essential for his self-confidence\, and a destructive or malignant a spect that separates the individual from his environment. While the produc tive narcissist has an ego ideal (Freud\, Lacan) in mind\, which is often embodied by others\, including those who think differently\, and is geared towards achieved status (Linon\, Merton)\, the destructive narcissist onl y knows his own "grandiose ego" (Kohut)\, which he seeks to realise as an ideal ego (Lacan) without regard for social values and norms. He wants to be recognised and desired by others even without achievement\, just as he was recognised and desired by his mother as an infant in the mirror stage\ , in the "imaginary" (Lacan) or in ascribed status (Linton\, Merton). This results in the contrasting attitudes of the productive and the destructiv e narcissist towards the other (the fellow human being): While the product ive narcissist conceives of the other in dialogue as an interlocutor who h elps him to realise his social ideal as an ego ideal\, the destructive nar cissist views the other monologically as a pretext (as a useful figure) or as an obstacle on the path to planned success. This psychoanalytical mode l takes on a social and historical dimension in the transition from modern ity to postmodernity (after the Second World War): the decline of the fami ly and paternal authority as well as the decline of cultural institutions such as religion\, art\, politics and school favour a development from the socially sanctioned ego ideal to the ideal ego. The individual demands to be recognised\, admired and desired by his environment even without achie vement\, i.e. without the realisation of social values\, ideals and norms. This results in the isolation of individuals and their alienation from on e another." X-ALT-DESC;FMTTYPE=text/html:

"\;Subjectivity\, narcissism\, ego id eal
For a dialogue model between psychoanalysis and sociology"\;< /h4>\n"\;It should be shown that narcissism has two complementary aspe cts that cannot be separated from each other: a productive aspect that con nects the individual with his social environment and is essential for his self-confidence\, and a destructive or malignant aspect that separates the individual from his environment. While the productive narcissist has an e go ideal (Freud\, Lacan) in mind\, which is often embodied by others\, inc luding those who think differently\, and is geared towards achieved status (Linon\, Merton)\, the destructive narcissist only knows his own "grandio se ego" (Kohut)\, which he seeks to realise as an ideal ego (Lacan) withou t regard for social values and norms. He wants to be recognised and desire d by others even without achievement\, just as he was recognised and desir ed by his mother as an infant in the mirror stage\, in the "imaginary" (La can) or in ascribed status (Linton\, Merton).
This results in the co ntrasting attitudes of the productive and the destructive narcissist towar ds the other (the fellow human being): While the productive narcissist con ceives of the other in dialogue as an interlocutor who helps him to realis e his social ideal as an ego ideal\, the destructive narcissist views the other monologically as a pretext (as a useful figure) or as an obstacle on the path to planned success.
This psychoanalytical model takes on a social and historical dimension in the transition from modernity to postm odernity (after the Second World War): the decline of the family and pater nal authority as well as the decline of cultural institutions such as reli gion\, art\, politics and school favour a development from the socially sa nctioned ego ideal to the ideal ego. The individual demands to be recognis ed\, admired and desired by his environment even without achievement\, i.e . without the realisation of social values\, ideals and norms. This result s in the isolation of individuals and their alienation from one another.&q uot\; LOCATION:BIS hall END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT UID:calendarize-ringvorlesung-mit-prof-dr-andrea-albrecht-tilman-venzl DTSTAMP:20151016T152416Z DTSTART:20151117T170000Z DTEND:20151117T190000Z SUMMARY:Series of lectures with Prof Dr Andrea Albrecht & Tilman Venzl DESCRIPTION:Series of lectures with Prof. Dr Andrea Albrecht & Tilman Venz l University of Stuttgart Institute for Literary Studies \nTheories of Rec ognition in Literary Studies. Rousseau\, Hegel\, Cohen\n Recognition theor ies of various origins are not only in vogue in philosophy\, but have also been increasingly recognised and included in literary studies in recent y ears. Various modes of appropriation that emerge in practice can be distin guished and methodologically described. Despite numerous and diverse refer ences\, however\, hardly any fundamental discussions of the opportunities and risks of importing theory have been undertaken to date\, which is cert ainly not least due to the complex and specialised social philosophical de bate. A look at the history of philosophy\, however\, reveals a multifacet ed picture of recognition theory\, or rather recognition theories. Whether that of Jean-Jacques Rousseau\, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel or Hermann Cohen\, each theory offers the interested literary scholar different persp ectives of connection and cognition. The pluralisation of the theory of re ference can therefore contribute to a reflective and conscious approach to the research field of 'literature and recognition'. The programme of the entire series can be found here. The individual programme is available her e. X-ALT-DESC;FMTTYPE=text/html:Series of lectures with Prof. D r Andrea Albrecht &\; Tilman Venzl University of Stuttgart Institut e for Literary Studies \n

Theories of Re cognition in Literary Studies. Rousseau\, Hegel\, Cohen

\n Recogni tion theories of various origins are not only in vogue in philosophy\, but have also been increasingly recognised and included in literary studies i n recent years. Various modes of appropriation that emerge in practice can be distinguished and methodologically described. Despite numerous and div erse references\, however\, hardly any fundamental discussions of the oppo rtunities and risks of importing theory have been undertaken to date\, whi ch is certainly not least due to the complex and specialised social philos ophical debate. A look at the history of philosophy\, however\, reveals a multifaceted picture of recognition theory\, or rather recognition theorie s. Whether that of Jean-Jacques Rousseau\, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel o r Hermann Cohen\, each theory offers the interested literary scholar diffe rent perspectives of connection and cognition. The pluralisation of the th eory of reference can therefore contribute to a reflective and conscious a pproach to the research field of 'literature and recognition'.
The p rogramme of the entire series can be found here. The individual programme is available here. LOCATION:Senate meeting room END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT UID:calendarize-ringvorlesung-mit-dr-christian-schneider DTSTAMP:20151016T153116Z DTSTART:20151124T170000Z DTEND:20151124T190000Z SUMMARY:Series of lectures with Dr Christian Schneider DESCRIPTION:Series of lectures with Dr Christian Schneider University of K assel Institute for Psychoanalysis \nThe living and the dead\n "The ideal of all processes of recognition is a communicative symmetry based on compl ete reciprocity between the partners. I would like to focus on two asymmet rical communication processes\, which nevertheless cannot do completely wi thout the aspect of reciprocity. Firstly\, the dialogue between the adult and the child\; secondly\, I would like to explore the problem of whether a discourse of recognition sui generis is conceivable beyond the boundarie s of life. In psychoanalysis\, mourning is conceived as an act of recognit ion of a loss. Mourning for a deceased person essentially consists of grad ually withdrawing the occupation from him or her as a significant object a nd thus psychologically ratifying the loss. Freud bound this process into a tight corset of work ("mourning work") that largely ignores the dialogue side of this process. In my contribution\, I attempt to discuss the possi bilities and aporias that arise when the communicative content of mourning is understood as a special form of a dialogical process of recognition th at detaches the problem of intersubjectivity from the paradigm of bodily l iving reciprocity." The programme of the entire series can be found here.T he individual announcement is available here. X-ALT-DESC;FMTTYPE=text/html:Series of lectures with Dr Christian Schneide r University of Kassel Institute for Psychoanalysis \n

The living and the dead

\n "\;The ideal of all processes of recognition is a communicative symmetry based on complete rec iprocity between the partners. I would like to focus on two asymmetrical c ommunication processes\, which nevertheless cannot do completely without t he aspect of reciprocity. Firstly\, the dialogue between the adult and the child\; secondly\, I would like to explore the problem of whether a disco urse of recognition sui generis is conceivable beyond the boundaries of li fe.
In psychoanalysis\, mourning is conceived as an act of recogniti on of a loss. Mourning for a deceased person essentially consists of gradu ally withdrawing the occupation from him or her as a significant object an d thus psychologically ratifying the loss. Freud bound this process into a tight corset of work ("mourning work") that largely ignores the dialogue side of this process.
In my contribution\, I attempt to discuss the possibilities and aporias that arise when the communicative content of mou rning is understood as a special form of a dialogical process of recogniti on that detaches the problem of intersubjectivity from the paradigm of bod ily living reciprocity."\; The programme of the entire series can be f ound here.

The individual an nouncement is available here. LOCATION:BIS hall END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT UID:calendarize-ringvorlesung-mit-prof-dr-marian-fuessel DTSTAMP:20151102T162554Z DTSTART:20151208T170000Z DTEND:20151208T190000Z SUMMARY:Series of lectures with Prof Dr Marian Füssel DESCRIPTION:Series of lectures with Prof Dr Marian Füssel Georg-August-Un iversität Göttingen Seminar for Medieval and Modern History \nContested recognition? Cultures of dispute in the academic field of the early modern period\n The pre-modern university constituted itself as a legally privil eged association of individuals whose members were subjectivised through v arious ritual practices. Only by passing through enrolment and deposition did young men become students\, and only graduation with a master's or doc torate conferred a specific status that could also be asserted beyond the corporation. However\, passing through these "rites of passage" (P. Bourdi eu) was by no means the end of the struggle for recognition of the respect ive subject position. Rather\, it was a matter of asserting\, rejecting an d renegotiating claims to validity on a daily basis. A particular focus wi ll be on forms of recognition materialised in objects such as clothing\, r egisters or insignia. The praxeological view of recognition conflicts as a situated execution of speech acts and actions in the interplay of objects and physical routines of actors puts recognition in the academic field in to perspective as a structurally precarious process. The programme of the entire series can be found here. The individual announcement is available here. X-ALT-DESC;FMTTYPE=text/html:Series of lectures with Prof Dr Marian Füssel Georg-August- Universität Göttingen Seminar for Medieval and Modern History \n

Contested recognition? Cultures of dispute in t he academic field of the early modern period

\n The pre-modern uni versity constituted itself as a legally privileged association of individu als whose members were subjectivised through various ritual practices. Onl y by passing through enrolment and deposition did young men become student s\, and only graduation with a master's or doctorate conferred a specific status that could also be asserted beyond the corporation. However\, passi ng through these "rites of passage" (P. Bourdieu) was by no means the end of the struggle for recognition of the respective subject position. Rather \, it was a matter of asserting\, rejecting and renegotiating claims to va lidity on a daily basis. A particular focus will be on forms of recognitio n materialised in objects such as clothing\, registers or insignia. The pr axeological view of recognition conflicts as a situated execution of speec h acts and actions in the interplay of objects and physical routines of ac tors puts recognition in the academic field into perspective as a structur ally precarious process. The programme of the entire series can be found here. The individual announcement is av ailable here. LOCATION:BIS hall END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT UID:calendarize-ringvorlesung-mit-prof-dr-ruth-sonderegger DTSTAMP:20151102T170516Z DTSTART:20151215T170000Z DTEND:20151215T190000Z SUMMARY:Series of lectures with Prof Dr Ruth Sonderegger DESCRIPTION:Series of lectures with Prof. Dr Ruth Sonderegger Academy of F ine Arts Vienna Institute of Philosophy and Aesthetic TheoryPhilosophy and Aesthetic Theory \nCynical subjugation\n The lecture deals with Cynic pra ctices of un/rehearsing habits that Foucault encounters in the context of his examination of parrhesia - courageously critical speech under risky co nditions. With the Cynic practices of un/rehearsing\, Foucault counters th e disciplining\, subjectivising training procedures of surveillance and pu nishment with resistant training practices\, without underestimating the p otential disciplining effect of the conscious unlearning of habits. For Fo ucault's Cynics\, there is therefore not only the option of providing the naturalised given with a critically negative sign. Rather\, they are also aware of the possibility of moving beyond what is so predetermined that on e does not feel patronised at all because it is so self-evident\, and of i nventing new practices in the process. In addition\, cynical un-practising suggests a form of activity that is at odds with the distinction between knowing how and knowing that\, which is particularly common among practice theorists. The programme of the entire series can be found here. The ind ividual programme is available here. X-ALT-DESC;FMTTYPE=text/html:Series of lectures with Prof. Dr Rut h Sonderegger Academy of Fine Arts Vienna
Institute of Philosoph y and Aesthetic Theory
Philosophy and Aesthetic Theory \n

Cynical subjugation

\n The lecture deals with Cynic practices of un/rehearsing habits that Foucault encounters in the context of his examination of parr hesia - courageously critical speech under risky conditions. With the Cyni c practices of un/rehearsing\, Foucault counters the disciplining\, subjec tivising training procedures of surveillance and punishment with resistant training practices\, without underestimating the potential disciplining e ffect of the conscious unlearning of habits. For Foucault's Cynics\, there is therefore not only the option of providing the naturalised given with a critically negative sign. Rather\, they are also aware of the possibilit y of moving beyond what is so predetermined that one does not feel patroni sed at all because it is so self-evident\, and of inventing new practices in the process. In addition\, cynical un-practising suggests a form of act ivity that is at odds with the distinction between knowing how and knowing that\, which is particularly common among practice theorists. The progra mme of the entire series can be found here< /a>. The individual programme is available here. LOCATION:BIS hall END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT UID:calendarize-ringvorlesung-mit-dr-jan-mueller DTSTAMP:20151102T171109Z DTSTART:20160119T170000Z DTEND:20160119T190000Z SUMMARY:Series of lectures with Dr Jan Müller DESCRIPTION:Series of lectures with Dr Jan Müller Technical University of Darmstadt Institute of Philosophy \nThe justice of recognition\n The figu re of "recognition" is so interesting because it promises an explanation o f how we should imagine and explain the reality and objectivity of our int erpersonal normative relationships. Even beyond anthropological or histori cal-philosophical models\, the fact that we always and repeatedly find our selves in relationships of objective and justifiable claims and obligation s cannot be attributed to constitutive acts of isolated imagined subjects or to the contractualistically imagined entanglement of several such subje ct perspectives. One understands the objective normativity and precariousn ess of modern (inter)subjectivity by understanding the reality of the proc ess of recognition: This is the thesis I argue for after problematising th e model of natural goodness and the subjectivist agency model of recogniti on. The process of recognition is not the product of individual action\; i t is the medium (or the form determination) of individual acts\, in their essential second-personal addressability. It seems as if this idea of a re cognition process makes it impossible to judge recognition as successful o r unsuccessful with a claim to appropriateness. But this is not true: the measure of the judgement of second-personal recognition is the idea of jus tice\, as exemplified by the figure of concrete second-personal recognitio n - as a becoming-just. This is a political idea\, the idea of successful sociality\; and the source of its power and validity is political practice . The programme of the entire series can be found here. The individual pro gramme is available here . X-ALT-DESC;FMTTYPE=text/html:Series of lectures with Dr Jan Müller Technical University of Darmstadt
Institute of Philosophy \n

The justice of recognition

\n The figure of "recognition" is so interesting because it promises an explanati on of how we should imagine and explain the reality and objectivity of our interpersonal normative relationships. Even beyond anthropological or his torical-philosophical models\, the fact that we always and repeatedly find ourselves in relationships of objective and justifiable claims and obliga tions cannot be attributed to constitutive acts of isolated imagined subje cts or to the contractualistically imagined entanglement of several such s ubject perspectives. One understands the objective normativity and precari ousness of modern (inter)subjectivity by understanding the reality of the process of recognition: This is the thesis I argue for after problematisin g the model of natural goodness and the subjectivist agency model of recog nition. The process of recognition is not the product of individual action \; it is the medium (or the form determination) of individual acts\, in th eir essential second-personal addressability. It seems as if this idea of a recognition process makes it impossible to judge recognition as successf ul or unsuccessful with a claim to appropriateness. But this is not true: the measure of the judgement of second-personal recognition is the idea of justice\, as exemplified by the figure of concrete second-personal recogn ition - as a becoming-just. This is a political idea\, the idea of success ful sociality\; and the source of its power and validity is political prac tice. The programme of the entire series can be found here. The individual programme is available here . LOCATION:BIS hall END:VEVENT BEGIN:VEVENT UID:calendarize-ringvorlesung-mit-prof-dr-theodore-schatzki DTSTAMP:20151102T171700Z DTSTART:20160126T170000Z DTEND:20160126T190000Z SUMMARY:Series of lectures with Prof Dr Theodore Schatzki DESCRIPTION:Series of lectures with Prof. Dr Theodore Schatzki University of KentuckyCollege of Arts & Sciences - Department of Philosophy \nPractic es and Learning\n This lecture considers the contribution that practice th eory makes to understanding learning. It argues that practice theory does not foster a new conception of learning but instead holds insights into le arning traditionally conceived of as the acquisition of knowledge. Part on e considers Lave & Wenger's idea that learning is coming to participate in practices. I argue that coming to participate in a practice amounts to ac quiring the practical and propositional knowledges needed to participate i n it. As a result\, learning qua coming to participate in practices is a v ersion of the traditional conception that highlights practical knowledge a nd ties contents and processes of knowledge to the organisation of social life as practices. Part two explores implications of the ontological centr ality of practices for learning and illustrates how practice theory ties t he contents and processes of knowledge to practices. After an interlude on the nature of knowledge\, the conclusion argues that training à la Wittg enstein underlies the acquisition of knowledge\, thus participation in pra ctices\, and is itself a form of learning. The programme of the entire ser ies can be found here. The individual announcement is available here. X-ALT-DESC;FMTTYPE=text/html:Series of lectures with Prof. Dr Theodore Schatzki Universit y of Kentucky
College of Arts &\; Sciences - Department of Philoso phy \n

Practices and Learning

\n This lecture considers the contrib ution that practice theory makes to understanding learning. It argues that practice theory does not foster a new conception of learning but instead holds insights into learning traditionally conceived of as the acquisition of knowledge. Part one considers Lave &\; Wenger's idea that learning is coming to participate in practices. I argue that coming to participate in a practice amounts to acquiring the practical and propositional knowled ges needed to participate in it. As a result\, learning qua coming to part icipate in practices is a version of the traditional conception that highl ights practical knowledge and ties contents and processes of knowledge to the organisation of social life as practices. Part two explores implicatio ns of the ontological centrality of practices for learning and illustrates how practice theory ties the contents and processes of knowledge to pract ices. After an interlude on the nature of knowledge\, the conclusion argue s that training à la Wittgenstein underlies the acquisition of knowledge\ , thus participation in practices\, and is itself a form of learning. The programme of the entire series can be found here. The individual announcement is available here. LOCATION:BIS hall END:VEVENT END:VCALENDAR