Stanford Humanities Center
Trivedi traces the evolution of crisis over the last hundred years or so, with a particular focus on how the concept has changed, especially in political philosophy contexts, in the first quarter of our present century.
In the final part of his four-part series, Religious Studies professor Gil Anidjar offers an incisive autocritique of the university.
In part three of his four-part series, Religious Studies professor Gil Anidjar offers an incisive autocritique of the university.
In part two of his four-part series, Religious Studies professor Gil Anidjar offers an incisive autocritique of the university.
Souto and Zabala discuss Zabala's newest book, which explores the importance of philosophy and art to listening to and interpreting warnings and other signs.
Two Stanford Humanities Center Fellows for 2023–24, Marroquín and Zuo, discuss the concept of hope.
Presumably, it has never been a good time for the humanities. Perhaps because it is simply in the nature of these disciplines to find themselves perpetually in crisis, lagging behind the times, dragging their leaden feet made out of indelible words, asking for more and more time in a civilization perpetually in a rush. They are constantly on the edge of a precipice, but we cannot deny that, while they awkwardly balance on the edge, they do enjoy magnificent views. After all, our fields do not thrive on security, on solid facts, on controlled experiments with measurable outcomes.
Nineteenth-century concepts of kinaesthesia influenced the evolution of Edmund Husserl's work, truly transforming the discipline of philosophy and setting an agenda for poststructuralism. In this piece, Noland argues that a sense category central to dance impacted what we now call "critical theory," as though the dancing body ghosted a discourse that has typically ignored it.
When playing chess, what do you mean when you say "check"? Per Wittgenstein, perhaps we communicate in ways that have surprisingly little to do with what we actually say.
