Course : Authority and Institutional Discourse
LEPC3 - Charalambos Tsekeris, Nikos Erinakis, Spiros Tegos, Despina Vertzagia, Ayelet Shavit
Course Description
It is generally accepted that leadership involves and presupposes the phenomena of authority and institutionalization. Consequently, leadership must be examined in relation to these two fundamental dimensions. The exercise of leadership necessitates the invocation and exercise of some form of authority, even in leadership styles that are collaborative or collegiate. Authority may be tangible, knowledge-based, person-based, or institutional. The recourse to authority may often be institutionalized, and authority frequently acquires institutional status. Therefore, the study of the specific epistemological (gnoseological) weight of authority is required. Furthermore, leadership is enacted through a series of conflicts and struggles related to the establishment of institutions and the development of institutional arguments and institutions. Here, authority plays a role but is not conclusive. Leadership cannot be understood without exploring these two factors, authority, and institutional discourse.
-
Course Syllabus
I. What is authority (philosophy - epistemology).
II. What is institutional discourse (philosophical genealogy of institutional discourses)
III. Leadership versus authority.
IV. Leadership and institutional discourses (ethical participation, rhetoric, philosophy of conflicts).
V. Authority in conflict with institutional discourses.
VI. Leadership without authority.
VII. Philosophy of history for the development of institutional discourses.
VIII. Authority and virtues
IX. Authority and politics
X. Formation of authority
XI. Authority and political theology
XII. Authority and authoritarianism
XIII. Authority and law.
XIV. Authority, Institutional Discourse, and Interculturality.Course Objectives/Goals
• Familiarization with the concept of institution and institutional discourse.
• Recognition of the role of authority in the life of institutions and in the unfolding of the phenomenon and mechanisms of leadership.
• Highlighting the relationships between authority and institutional discourse.
• Decision-making on leadership will be examined from the perspective of forms of authority and conflicts at the level of institutional discourse.
• Study of leadership as the origin of both authority and institutional discourse phenomena.
• Emphasis on the need for philosophical and epistemological training of young researchers and scientists to address manifestations of institutionalism and authority in practice.
• Beyond the broader framework, the specific approach to the philosophy/epistemology of authority and the processes of developing institutional discourses will be analyzed.Instructional Methods
This course employs a dynamic blend of instructional methods to ensure a comprehensive learning experience. With a focus on engagement and flexibility, the instructional approach comprises 75% face-to-face teaching, fostering direct interaction between instructors and students in a traditional classroom setting. Additionally, 25% of the course involves distant teaching, which can be delivered either synchronously or asynchronously. This remote component allows students to access course materials, participate in discussions, and engage with learning activities at their own pace, leveraging online platforms and resources. By combining face-to-face interaction with remote learning opportunities, the course aims to cater to diverse learning styles and preferences, facilitating deeper understanding and collaboration among students while accommodating individual schedules and needs.
Assessment Methods
- 30%: Participation
- 70%: Written assignment
Prerequisites/Prior Knowledge
This module has no prerequisites in the curriculum or prior knowledge requirements.
Instructors
Georgios Arabatzis is Professor of Byzantine Philosophy, Department of Philosophy, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens. He holds a PhD in Philosophy from E.H.E.S.S., Paris, France (1995). His publications include Éthique du bonheur et orthodoxie à Byzance (IVe-XIIe s.), avec une préface d’André Guillou, Paris, Éd. P. Belon/Diffusion De Boccard, 1998 ― coll. “Textes. Documents. Études” No. 4.; Studies on Supernaturalism, ed. G. Arabatzis, Berlin, Logos Verlag, 2009; and L’actualité de la pensée byzantine, ed. G. Arabatzis, Byzantinische Forschungen, XXXI, 2013 (Adolf M. Hakkert, Amsterdam).
E-mail: garabatz@philosophy.uoa.gr ♦ ORCID iD: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4926-9900
Spyridon Tegos is an Associate Professor of Moral and Political Philosophy at the University of Crete, Greece. He holds a Ph.D from the University of Paris X-Nanterre with a thesis on the concept of social sentiments (friendship, sympathy, compassion) in early modern political philosophy. In his research, he concentrates on the history of moral, social and political philosophy (Scottish and French enlightenment). He has recently published Ritualistic Enlightenment. Beliefs, Religious and Political Rituals in David Hume and Jean-Jacques Rousseau (Athens: Armos, 2019) - his current research focuses on the classical French sources in early modern theater and belles-lettres that inspired early Scottish liberalism (David Hume, Adam Smith) and, in its aftermath, French liberalism (Germaine de Staël, Alexis de Tocqueville) with respect to the social and political relevance of “middling rank” (middle class) manners.
E-mail: stegos@fks.uoc.gr ♦ ORCID iD: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5563-1836
Despina Vertzagia holds a PhD in Political Philosophy from Panteion University (2025), an MA in Philosophy (2021), and a BA in Philosophy (2016) from the National and Kapodistrian University of Athens. She is an Adjunct Lecturer at the National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, where she teaches Metaethics at the postgraduate level, and previously served as an Adjunct Lecturer at Panteion University, teaching Social and Political Philosophy. She is a Senior Researcher at the Biopolitics Research Centre of Panteion University and a Research Fellow at the Applied Philosophy Research Laboratory of the National and Kapodistrian University of Athens. She has served as Production Manager of NKUA Applied Philosophy Research Lab Press since 2017 and was Managing Editor of Conatus – Journal of Philosophy from 2016 to 2026. She has been awarded several prestigious research fellowships and grants, including a Pre-doctoral Fellowship at Harvard University's Center for Hellenic Studies, a Robert L. Platzman Memorial Fellowship at the University of Chicago Library, and research grants from the Ryoichi Sasakawa Young Leaders Fellowship Fund (Sylff). Her research interests lie in ancient and modern political philosophy. She has authored a monograph, published articles in academic journals, and contributed chapters to edited volumes, as well as translated philosophical and bioethical texts into Greek.
E-mail: dvertzagia@philosophy.uoa.gr ♦ ORCID iD: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7894-8657
Ayelet Shavit is a philosopher of science, chair of the Israeli Philosophical Association and the department for Action-Oriented Philosophy at Tel Hai College. She studies the practical meaning of ‘collaboration’, ‘group’ , ‘individual', and ‘heterogeneity’, in ecology, evolution and academia-community partnerships. As a result, Ayelet received the “Van Leer Prize”, the “PSA (Philosophy of Science Association) Outreach and Engagement Award”, Israel’s Council for Higher Education "Higher Education Prize", the “Bloomfield Prize” and the EU Marie Curie Fellowship. Her work is published in TheJournal of Philosophy, Philosophy of Science, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, and in the following books: One for All? (Magnes, 2008),Stepping in the Same River Twice (Yale, 2017) and Landscapes of Collectivities(MIT, 2018). Ayelet co-founded “Town-Square Academia”, which joins academic and local experts to co-lead free and proactive courses and research in underprivileged localities across the Galilee, producing relevant knowledge for all.
E-mail: ayelet.shavit@gmail.com ♦ ORCID iD: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4683-0857
Textbooks
To be added soon.
Bibliography
- The Sophists (fragments)
- Plato, The Sophist
- Aristotle, Rhetorics
- Hobbes, Thomas, 1668, Leviathan, Edwin Curley (ed.), Indianapolis: Hackett Publishers, 1992.
- Weber, Max, 1918, “Politics as a Vocation,” in From Max Weber: Essays in Sociology, H. H. Gerth and C. Wright Mills (eds.), London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1970.
- Anti-humanisme et discours institutionnel à Byzance. Le cas Kekaumenos, Alessandria, Edizioni dell'Orso, "Hellenica", 2021.
- Hannah Arendt, "Authority in the Twentieth Century." Review of Politics (1956)
- Hannah Arendt, On Violence (1970).
- Carl Joachim Friedrich, Tradition and Authority. London: Macmillan (1972)
- Sebastian De Grazia. (1959). "What Authority Is Not". American Political Science Review 53(2): 321–331.
- Rosen, Arie (2023). "Political Reasons and the Limits of Political Authority." Legal Theory 29 (1): 63–88.
- Jean-Michel David, Frédéric Hurlet (eds), L'auctoritas à Rome: Une notion constitutive de la culture politique, Ausonius Éditions, 2023.
- Jenny Bryan, Robert Wardy, James Warren (eds), Authors and Authorities in Ancient Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, 2018
- Claire Cutler, Virginia Haufler, Tony Porter (eds), Private Authority and International Affairs, SUNY Press, 1999
- Tristan J. Rogers, The Authority of Virtue: Institutions and Character in the Good Society, Routledge, 2020
- Aaron Stalnaker, Mastery, Dependence, and the Ethics of Authority, Oxford University Press, 2019
- Bertrand Russell, Authority and the Individual, Routledge, 2005.
- Başak Cali, The Authority of International Law: Obedience, Respect, and Rebuttal, Oxford University Press, 2015
- Shari Boodts, Johan Leemans, Brigitte Meijns (eds), Shaping Authority: How Did a Person Become an Authority in Antiquity, the Middle Ages and the Renaissance?, Brepols, 2016.
Unit overview
The unit examines authority as a philosophical and epistemological problem, exploring the conditions under which individuals, texts, traditions, institutions, and systems of knowledge acquire legitimacy and recognition. Rather than reducing authority to political domination or institutional power, it investigates its relationship with truth, rationality, interpretation, tradition, and the historical formation of knowledge. Central to the course is the distinction between epistemic authority—authority grounded in knowledge and intellectual competence—and institutional authority, which derives from established structures, traditions, and recognised positions. The relationship between these forms is examined through ancient Greek philosophy, intellectual history, and modern critical epistemology. The course also considers the tension between authority and philosophical critique: whether authority constitutes a necessary condition of the transmission of knowledge or whether it represents an obstacle to autonomous thinking.
Keywords
Authority; Epistemic Authority; Institutional Authority; Philosophical Critique; Knowledge Transmission; Epistemology; Intellectual History; Ancient Greek Philosophy
Required readings
- Plato. Republic, particularly Books VI–VII.
- Arabatzis, G. (2021). Anti-humanisme et discours institutionnel à Byzance. Le cas Kekaumenos. Alessandria: Edizioni dell'Orso.
Complementary readings
- Weber, Max. "Politics as a Vocation." In From Max Weber: Essays in Sociology, edited and translated by H. H. Gerth and C. Wright Mills. New York: Oxford University Press, 1946.
- Freud, Sigmund. (1921). Group Psychology and the Analysis of the Ego. In The Standard Edition of the Complete Psychological Works of Sigmund Freud, Vol. XVIII. London: Hogarth Press, 1955.
- Foucault, Michel. (1977). Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. Translated by Alan Sheridan. New York: Pantheon Books.
This unit examines the philosophical origins, historical development, and epistemological foundations of institutional discourse. Drawing on philosophy, institutional discourse, and the historical formation of normative practices, it investigates how institutions establish legitimacy, organise knowledge, regulate human conduct, and shape individual and collective identities. Institutional discourse is approached not simply as the language of established institutions but as a historically constituted system of concepts, norms, representations, and practices through which social and intellectual authority is produced and maintained. Particular attention is given to the relationship between private intentions and public norms. The course develops a philosophical genealogy of institutional discourse through four principal perspectives: Aristotle provides the foundations for understanding the relationship between language, ethical formation, political community, and institutional order. Nietzsche introduces the genealogical critique of moral values, revealing the historical conflicts and power relations underlying established norms. Freud investigates the psychological mechanisms of identification, repression, and internalisation through which institutional authority becomes part of individual and collective subjectivity. Finally, Foucault offers an analysis of the relationship between discourse, knowledge, power, and disciplinary institutions, demonstrating how historically specific regimes of truth produce norms and forms of subjectivity. The unit examines both the continuity and discontinuity of institutional discourses from antiquity to modernity. Its central question is how historically contingent forms of discourse acquire the status of legitimate, authoritative, and seemingly universal norms.
Keywords
Institutional Discourse; Institutional Authority; Genealogy; Normativity; Discourse and Power; Subjectivity; Knowledge and Power; Aristotle, Nietzsche, Freud, and Foucault
Required readings
- Aristotle. Nicomachean Ethics.
- Arabatzis, G. (2021). Anti-humanisme et discours institutionnel à Byzance. Le cas Kekaumenos. Alessandria: Edizioni dell'Orso.
- Nietzsche, F. (1887/1994). On the Genealogy of Morality. Edited by Keith Ansell-Pearson, translated by Carol Diethe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Complementary readings
- Freud, S. (1913/1955). Totem and Taboo. In The Standard Edition of the Complete Psychological Works of Sigmund Freud, Vol. XIII. London: Hogarth Press.
- Foucault, M. (1972). The Archaeology of Knowledge and the Discourse on Language. New York: Pantheon Books.
Unit overview
This unit examines the philosophical, epistemological, and psychological distinctions between leadership and authority, investigating the foundations of legitimacy, obedience, influence, and the exercise of power. It explores how leadership and authority emerge, acquire legitimacy, and operate within different historical and institutional contexts. The central distinction concerns authority as a recognised claim to legitimate direction or judgment, and leadership as the capacity to guide, influence, and mobilise individuals or communities. Although these concepts frequently overlap, leadership does not necessarily presuppose institutional authority, just as the possession of authority does not automatically imply effective leadership. The course approaches this distinction through five complementary philosophical perspectives. Aristotle provides the classical foundations for understanding political leadership, practical wisdom (phronēsis), virtue, and the legitimacy of ruling. Nietzsche introduces a critical analysis of domination, the will to power, the formation of values, and the distinction between creative leadership and established moral authority. Freud examines the psychological foundations of leadership through identification, collective attachment, paternal authority, and the emotional mechanisms underlying obedience. Max Weber offers a sociological and philosophical account of legitimate domination, particularly the distinction between traditional, charismatic, and legal-rational authority. Finally, Michel Foucault investigates leadership and authority within historically constituted relations of power, institutional discourses, disciplinary practices, and the production of knowledge. The course pays particular attention to how philosophical traditions and institutional discourses construct ideal models of rulers, intellectual leaders, and authoritative figures. Political and philosophical thought provides a significant historical field for examining the tension between personal leadership, moral competence, intellectual authority, and institutional legitimacy. The fundamental question guiding the course is whether legitimate leadership derives from institutional position, intellectual and moral excellence, collective recognition, psychological identification, or historically constituted relations of power.
Keywords
Leadership; Authority; Legitimacy; Power; Obedience; Political Leadership; Charismatic Authority; Philosophical Perspectives
Required readings
- Arabatzis, G. (2021). Anti-humanisme et discours institutionnel à Byzance: Le cas Kekaumenos. Alessandria: Edizioni dell'Orso.
- Aristotle. Politics.
Complementary readings
- Nietzsche, F. (1886/2002). Beyond Good and Evil. Edited by Rolf-Peter Horstmann and Judith Norman. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- Freud, S. (1930/1961). Civilisation and Its Discontents. In The Standard Edition, Vol. XXI. London: Hogarth Press.
- Weber, M. (1978). Economy and Society: An Outline of Interpretive Sociology. Edited by Guenther Roth and Claus Wittich. Berkeley: University of California Press.
- Foucault, M. (2007). Security, Territory, Population: Lectures at the Collège de France, 1977–1978. Edited by Michel Senellart. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Unit overview
Ethical participation focuses on how institutions engage stakeholders transparently, ensuring that communication is not just top-down but collaborative. Deliberative Democracy: Decision-making processes that prioritise open dialogue, consensus-building, and equal standing among all participants. Strategic Rhetoric: Rhetoric is the vehicle through which leadership is performed. Institutions use specific linguistic strategies to establish legitimacy, persuade audiences, and navigate crises. Foucault and Discursive Power: The philosophical view that power is not just held by individuals, but embedded in the very language, rules, and institutions we accept as normal. Restorative Justice: A conflict-resolution discourse focused on repairing harm and rebuilding institutional relationships rather than enforcing purely punitive measures.Keywords
Deliberative Democracy; Strategic Rhetoric; truth as power; restorative justice
Required readings
- Elster, Jon (ed.) Deliberative Democracy. Cambridge University Press, 1998.
Complementary readings
- Aristotle. The Art of Rhetoric. Translated by J.H. Freese. Harvatrd University Press, 2020.
- Savulescu, Julian, and Evangelos D. Protopapadakis. “'Ethical Minefields' and the Voice of Common Sense: A Discussion with Julian Savulescu." Conatus - Journal of Philosophy 4, no. 1 (2019): 125–133. doi: https://doi.org/10.12681/cjp.19712.
Unit overview
Legitimacy vs. Coercion: Institutions try to convert power into legitimate authority through shared values and official rhetoric. When that rhetoric fails or is perceived as abusive or corrupt, the gap between institutional demands and individual moral agency widens. Michel Foucault's " Order of Discourse": Foucault examines the logos as a form of mediation between “originating experience” and knowledge produced by discourse. Foucault suggests we “call into question our will to truth, restore to discourse its character as an event, and finally throw off the sovereignty of the signifier.”
Keywords
institutional discourse; political reasons; political authority; order of discourse
Required readings
- Rosen, Arie, " Political reasons and the limits of political authority", Legal Theory (2023), 29, 63–88.
Complementary readings
- Pentzold, C. Discourse Analysis: Orders of Discourse – by Michel Foucault (1971). In: Spiller, R., Rudeloff, C., Döbler, T. (eds) Key works: Theories in communication studies. Palgrave Macmillan, 2023.
- Foucault, Michel. “From The Order of Discourse." The Rhetorical Tradition: Readings from Classical Times to the Present. 2nd ed. Trans. Ian McLeod. Eds. Patricia Bizzell and Bruce Herzberg. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin's, 2001.
Unit overview
Lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum .Lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum Lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum Lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum Lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum.
Keywords
ethics; morality; good; evil; ethical stance; consequentialism; deontology; virtue ethics; metaethics; applied ethics; theoretical ethics; normative ethics
Required readings
- Driver, Julia. "Moral Theory." The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2022 Edition). Edited by Edward N. Zalta and Uri Nodelman. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2022/entries/moral-theory/.
Complementary readings
- Parry, Richard and Harald Thorsrud. "Ancient Ethical Theory." The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2021 Edition). Edited by Edward N. Zalta. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2021/entries/ethics-ancient/.
- Savulescu, Julian, and Evangelos D. Protopapadakis. “'Ethical Minefields' and the Voice of Common Sense: A Discussion with Julian Savulescu." Conatus - Journal of Philosophy 4, no. 1 (2019): 125–133. doi: https://doi.org/10.12681/cjp.19712.
Unit overview
This unit examines the relationship between philosophical writing and institutional authority, focusing on the ways in which political and religious institutions shape the conditions under which philosophical ideas can be articulated, communicated, and disseminated. Particular attention is devoted to the phenomenon of esoteric writing, understood as a distinctive mode of philosophical communication that emerges in response to the tensions between the pursuit of truth, prevailing opinions, and established structures of authority. Drawing primarily on Leo Strauss’s analysis of persecution and the art of writing, the unit explores the distinction between exoteric and esoteric teachings and considers how philosophical texts may operate on different levels of meaning. It investigates the ways in which censorship, religious orthodoxy, political persecution, and institutional expectations influence not only what philosophers are permitted to say publicly but also how they construct their arguments and address different audiences. The discussion further examines the relationship between philosophy and the institutional regulation of public discourse, raising questions about the authority to define legitimate knowledge, the boundaries of acceptable expression, and the distinction between philosophical inquiry and publicly sanctioned doctrines. Particular emphasis is placed on the tension between the philosopher's commitment to rational inquiry and the political community's concern for the preservation of its authoritative beliefs and institutions. Through selected references to Plato, Maimonides, and Spinoza, the unit situates esoteric writing within the broader history of political philosophy, highlighting both the historical conditions of its emergence and its philosophical significance. It also considers Strauss's controversial claim that esoteric writing cannot be adequately understood merely as a response to external censorship, but must also be examined in relation to the enduring tension between philosophy and political society. Ultimately, the unit approaches esoteric writing not simply as a literary or interpretative technique, but as a philosophical problem concerning the relationship between truth, authority, and institutional discourse.
.
Keywords
esoteric writing; exoteric writing; institutional discourse; philosophical authority; political persecution; religious orthodoxy; censorship; freedom of thought; freedom of expression; public discourse; philosophical truth; political authority; philosophy and the city; Leo Strauss; hermeneutics
Required readings
-
Strauss, Leo. Persecution and the Art of Writing. University of Chicago Press, 1952. Chapter 1, “Introduction,” and Chapter 2, “Persecution and the Art of Writing.”
Complementary readings
-
Melzer, Arthur M. Philosophy Between the Lines: The Lost History of Esoteric Writing. University of Chicago Press, 2014.
-
Strauss, Leo. “On a Forgotten Kind of Writing.” In What Is Political Philosophy? And Other Studies, 221–232. Free Press, 1959.
-
Unit overview
This unit examines the emergence of liberal political thought through the relationship between institutional authority, religious toleration, and freedom of conscience. It explores how early modern political philosophy reconsidered the foundations and limits of political and religious authority, challenging established forms of institutional control over individual belief, philosophical inquiry, and public expression.Particular attention is devoted to the transformation of the relationship between political sovereignty and religious authority in the writings of Thomas Hobbes, Benedict de Spinoza, and John Locke. The unit investigates how competing conceptions of sovereignty, natural right, and individual freedom contributed to the development of new arguments concerning the legitimate scope of institutional power and the distinction between public authority and private conviction. Drawing on Spinoza's Theological-Political Treatise, the discussion examines the relationship between freedom of philosophizing (libertas philosophandi), religious authority, and the preservation of political order. Spinoza's defence of freedom of thought and expression is considered in relation to the institutional regulation of religious doctrines and the political implications of theological disagreement. The unit subsequently explores Locke's defence of religious toleration, focusing on his distinction between the responsibilities of civil government and the purposes of religious associations, as well as the historical and philosophical limitations of his conception of toleration. The discussion further considers the relationship between liberalism and institutional discourse, asking how political institutions establish the boundaries of legitimate public expression while simultaneously claiming to protect individual liberty. Particular emphasis is placed on the tension between the authority of the state to maintain civil peace and the freedom of individuals to question prevailing religious, moral, and political doctrines. Ultimately, the unit approaches religious toleration not merely as a moral virtue or a principle of peaceful coexistence, but as a fundamental problem of political philosophy concerning the legitimacy, scope, and limitations of institutional authority. It invites students to consider whether liberal political institutions can remain neutral toward competing conceptions of truth and how the protection of freedom of conscience transforms the relationship between political power and public discourse.
Keywords
liberalism; institutional discourse; religious toleration; freedom of conscience; freedom of thought; freedom of expression; political authority; religious authority; sovereignty; institutional legitimacy; natural rights; church and state; religious pluralism; institutional neutrality; libertas philosophandi; public discourse
Required readings
-
Spinoza, Benedict de. Theological-Political Treatise. Edited by Jonathan Israel. Translated by Michael Silverthorne and Jonathan Israel. Cambridge University Press, 2007. Chapters 19–20.
-
Locke, John. A Letter Concerning Toleration. Translated by William Popple, 1689.
Complementary readings
-
Hobbes, Thomas. Leviathan. Edited by Richard Tuck. Cambridge University Press, 1996. Chapters 16–18 and 21.
-
Mendus, Susan. Toleration and the Limits of Liberalism.Humanities Press International, 1989.
-
Unit overview
This unit examines the relationship between sovereignty, political authority, and institutional discourse through the political and legal philosophy of Carl Schmitt. Particular attention is devoted to the tension between legal norms and political decisions, exploring whether institutional authority can be fully grounded in established legal procedures or whether the existence and preservation of political order ultimately depend upon a sovereign decision.
Drawing primarily on Schmitt's Political Theology, the unit investigates the concept of sovereignty in relation to the state of exception, focusing on the circumstances under which the ordinary legal framework may be suspended. It considers Schmitt's distinction between norm and decision and examines the implications of his decisionist account of sovereignty for understanding the foundations, legitimacy, and limitations of institutional authority.
The discussion further explores Schmitt's critique of liberal parliamentarism and his distinction between legality and legitimacy. Particular emphasis is placed on the relationship between institutional discourse, political representation, and the authority of constitutional institutions. The unit investigates whether parliamentary deliberation and legal procedures can provide an adequate foundation for political order or whether, as Schmitt argues, the political necessarily involves decisions that cannot be reduced to rational discussion or procedural norms.The unit also introduces Schmitt's concept of the political, particularly the friend–enemy distinction, in order to examine the limits of institutional neutrality and the relationship between political conflict and institutional identity. These considerations provide a basis for assessing the extent to which institutional discourse can accommodate fundamental political disagreements without presupposing a prior conception of political unity.
Finally, the unit situates Schmitt's arguments within the constitutional crises of the Weimar Republic and critically considers the relationship between his political theory, authoritarianism, and the historical consequences of his opposition to liberal constitutionalism. Ultimately, the unit approaches sovereignty not merely as a legal concept but as a fundamental philosophical problem concerning the relationship between political decision, institutional legitimacy, and the conditions under which legal and political authority can be established, maintained, or suspended.
Keywords
Carl Schmitt; institutional discourse; sovereignty; political authority; political decision; decisionism; state of exception; political theology; legality; legitimacy; constitutional order; liberal parliamentarism; political representation; friend–enemy distinction
Required readings
-
Schmitt, Carl. The Concept of the Political. Expanded edition. Translated by George Schwab. University of Chicago Press, 2007.
Complementary readings
-
Schmitt, Carl. Political Theology: Four Chapters on the Concept of Sovereignty. Translated by George Schwab. University of Chicago Press, 2005. Chapters 1–3.
-
Unit overview
Lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum .Lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum Lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum Lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum Lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum.
Keywords
ethics; morality; good; evil; ethical stance; consequentialism; deontology; virtue ethics; metaethics; applied ethics; theoretical ethics; normative ethics
Required readings
- Driver, Julia. "Moral Theory." The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2022 Edition). Edited by Edward N. Zalta and Uri Nodelman. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2022/entries/moral-theory/.
Complementary readings
- Parry, Richard and Harald Thorsrud. "Ancient Ethical Theory." The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2021 Edition). Edited by Edward N. Zalta. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2021/entries/ethics-ancient/.
- Savulescu, Julian, and Evangelos D. Protopapadakis. “'Ethical Minefields' and the Voice of Common Sense: A Discussion with Julian Savulescu." Conatus - Journal of Philosophy 4, no. 1 (2019): 125–133. doi: https://doi.org/10.12681/cjp.19712.
Unit overview
Lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum .Lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum Lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum Lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum Lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum.
Keywords
ethics; morality; good; evil; ethical stance; consequentialism; deontology; virtue ethics; metaethics; applied ethics; theoretical ethics; normative ethics
Required readings
- Driver, Julia. "Moral Theory." The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2022 Edition). Edited by Edward N. Zalta and Uri Nodelman. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2022/entries/moral-theory/.
Complementary readings
- Parry, Richard and Harald Thorsrud. "Ancient Ethical Theory." The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2021 Edition). Edited by Edward N. Zalta. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2021/entries/ethics-ancient/.
- Savulescu, Julian, and Evangelos D. Protopapadakis. “'Ethical Minefields' and the Voice of Common Sense: A Discussion with Julian Savulescu." Conatus - Journal of Philosophy 4, no. 1 (2019): 125–133. doi: https://doi.org/10.12681/cjp.19712.
Unit overview
Lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum .Lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum Lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum Lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum Lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum.
Keywords
ethics; morality; good; evil; ethical stance; consequentialism; deontology; virtue ethics; metaethics; applied ethics; theoretical ethics; normative ethics
Required readings
- Driver, Julia. "Moral Theory." The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2022 Edition). Edited by Edward N. Zalta and Uri Nodelman. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2022/entries/moral-theory/.
Complementary readings
- Parry, Richard and Harald Thorsrud. "Ancient Ethical Theory." The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2021 Edition). Edited by Edward N. Zalta. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2021/entries/ethics-ancient/.
- Savulescu, Julian, and Evangelos D. Protopapadakis. “'Ethical Minefields' and the Voice of Common Sense: A Discussion with Julian Savulescu." Conatus - Journal of Philosophy 4, no. 1 (2019): 125–133. doi: https://doi.org/10.12681/cjp.19712.
Unit overview
Lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum .Lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum Lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum Lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum Lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum.
Keywords
ethics; morality; good; evil; ethical stance; consequentialism; deontology; virtue ethics; metaethics; applied ethics; theoretical ethics; normative ethics
Required readings
- Driver, Julia. "Moral Theory." The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2022 Edition). Edited by Edward N. Zalta and Uri Nodelman. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2022/entries/moral-theory/.
Complementary readings
- Parry, Richard and Harald Thorsrud. "Ancient Ethical Theory." The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2021 Edition). Edited by Edward N. Zalta. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2021/entries/ethics-ancient/.
- Savulescu, Julian, and Evangelos D. Protopapadakis. “'Ethical Minefields' and the Voice of Common Sense: A Discussion with Julian Savulescu." Conatus - Journal of Philosophy 4, no. 1 (2019): 125–133. doi: https://doi.org/10.12681/cjp.19712.
Unit overview
Lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum .Lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum Lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum Lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum Lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum lorem ipsum.
Keywords
ethics; morality; good; evil; ethical stance; consequentialism; deontology; virtue ethics; metaethics; applied ethics; theoretical ethics; normative ethics
Required readings
- Driver, Julia. "Moral Theory." The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2022 Edition). Edited by Edward N. Zalta and Uri Nodelman. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2022/entries/moral-theory/.
Complementary readings
- Parry, Richard and Harald Thorsrud. "Ancient Ethical Theory." The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2021 Edition). Edited by Edward N. Zalta. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2021/entries/ethics-ancient/.
- Savulescu, Julian, and Evangelos D. Protopapadakis. “'Ethical Minefields' and the Voice of Common Sense: A Discussion with Julian Savulescu." Conatus - Journal of Philosophy 4, no. 1 (2019): 125–133. doi: https://doi.org/10.12681/cjp.19712.