Follow your favourite podcasts, listen offline and in the car with CarPlay and Android Auto, and always pick up where you left off. Free to try.
We suffer from genealogical anxiety when we worry that the contingent origins of our representations, once revealed, will somehow undermine or cast doubt on those representations. Is such anxiety ever rational? Many have apparently thought so, from pre-Socratic critics of Greek theology to contemporary evolutionary debunkers of morality. One strategy for vindicating critical genealogies is to see them as undermining the epistemic standing of our representations—the justification of our beliefs, the aptness of our concepts, and so on. In this talk, Amia Srinivasan argues that this strategy is not as promising as it might first seem. Instead, she suggests that critical genealogies can wield a sort of meta-epistemic power; in so far as we wish to resist the genealogical critic, we are under pressure to see ourselves as the beneficiaries of a certain kind of good luck: what she calls genealogical luck. But there is also a resolutely non-epistemic way of understanding the power of critical genealogies, one that is essential, she argues, for understanding the genealogical projects of various theorists, including Nietzsche and Catharine MacKinnon. For critical genealogies can reveal what it is that our representations do—and what we, in turn, might do with them.Uploaded 13-07-21This talk was given by Amia Srinivasan in 2019 as part of The Aristotelian Society. For more information: www.aristoteliansociety.org.uk#philosophy #epistemology #skepticism #nietzsche #foucault Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
