Afterword: Democracy, Difference, and Deconstruction

Afterword: Democracy, Difference, and Deconstruction

A theory of feminist obligation requires us to attend to the political context for obligations, and that context requires participation, communication, and interpersonal relationship as the model for political community. I admit that this “conclusion” may seem somewhat inconclusive to many readers,...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
1. Verfasser: Hirschmann, Nancy J
Format: Buchkapitel
Sprache:eng
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 342
container_issue
container_start_page 296
container_title
container_volume
creator Hirschmann, Nancy J
description A theory of feminist obligation requires us to attend to the political context for obligations, and that context requires participation, communication, and interpersonal relationship as the model for political community. I admit that this “conclusion” may seem somewhat inconclusive to many readers, not all of them traditional or mainstream. Describing the context for obligation may be interesting and useful, but it is still not the same as developing a theory of obligation such as consent theory. If obligation is given, what are those obligationsto? What are myexactpolitical obligations in any given situation? In any given relationship? In
doi_str_mv 10.7591/9781501725647-009
format Book Chapter
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>jstor_walte</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_walterdegruyter_books_10_7591_9781501725647_009</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>10.7591/j.ctv3mt9x3.11</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>10.7591/j.ctv3mt9x3.11</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-j739-b9ade095d5dce25e12b02a03b6237d6a64da8b073f474b70291934e706beaa753</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpVj91KAzEQhSMi2NY-gJc-wOqZTJLZXJbiHxS86X1ImqywVhZ2V6tv70pV8OoMh_lm-JS6JFyL9XTjpSYLEm2dkQrwJ2r-V9hTNUcNMprhca6Ww9AC0NCODWZqtmrG0h-6Pl-osybuh7L8yYXa3t1u1w_V5un-cb3aVK2wr5KPucDbbPOuaFtIJ-gITk6zZBedybFOEG6MmCTQnjybInCpxCiWF8odzx7ifvqcy3P_9jkNIXXdyxAI4Vsq_JMKk9QEXh3Bdhi73_U27MZ3fh39Bwci_gJtXUhE</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Publisher</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>book_chapter</recordtype></control><display><type>book_chapter</type><title>Afterword: Democracy, Difference, and Deconstruction</title><source>Project MUSE Open Access Books</source><source>De Gruyter Open Access Books</source><source>OAPEN</source><source>DOAB: Directory of Open Access Books</source><creator>Hirschmann, Nancy J</creator><creatorcontrib>Hirschmann, Nancy J</creatorcontrib><description>A theory of feminist obligation requires us to attend to the political context for obligations, and that context requires participation, communication, and interpersonal relationship as the model for political community. I admit that this “conclusion” may seem somewhat inconclusive to many readers, not all of them traditional or mainstream. Describing the context for obligation may be interesting and useful, but it is still not the same as developing a theory of obligation such as consent theory. If obligation is given, what are those obligationsto? What are myexactpolitical obligations in any given situation? In any given relationship? In</description><identifier>ISBN: 0801423090</identifier><identifier>ISBN: 9780801423093</identifier><identifier>EISBN: 1501725645</identifier><identifier>EISBN: 9781501725647</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.7591/9781501725647-009</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press</publisher><ispartof>Rethinking Obligation, 2018, p.296-342</ispartof><rights>1992 Cornell University</rights><rights>2019 Cornell University Press, Ithaca</rights><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.7591/9781501725647-009/pdf$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwalterdegruyter$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.7591/9781501725647-009/html$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwalterdegruyter$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>779,780,784,793,21621,23379,24781,27925,67574,69358</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Hirschmann, Nancy J</creatorcontrib><title>Afterword: Democracy, Difference, and Deconstruction</title><title>Rethinking Obligation</title><description>A theory of feminist obligation requires us to attend to the political context for obligations, and that context requires participation, communication, and interpersonal relationship as the model for political community. I admit that this “conclusion” may seem somewhat inconclusive to many readers, not all of them traditional or mainstream. Describing the context for obligation may be interesting and useful, but it is still not the same as developing a theory of obligation such as consent theory. If obligation is given, what are those obligationsto? What are myexactpolitical obligations in any given situation? In any given relationship? In</description><isbn>0801423090</isbn><isbn>9780801423093</isbn><isbn>1501725645</isbn><isbn>9781501725647</isbn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>book_chapter</rsrctype><creationdate>2018</creationdate><recordtype>book_chapter</recordtype><sourceid/><recordid>eNpVj91KAzEQhSMi2NY-gJc-wOqZTJLZXJbiHxS86X1ImqywVhZ2V6tv70pV8OoMh_lm-JS6JFyL9XTjpSYLEm2dkQrwJ2r-V9hTNUcNMprhca6Ww9AC0NCODWZqtmrG0h-6Pl-osybuh7L8yYXa3t1u1w_V5un-cb3aVK2wr5KPucDbbPOuaFtIJ-gITk6zZBedybFOEG6MmCTQnjybInCpxCiWF8odzx7ifvqcy3P_9jkNIXXdyxAI4Vsq_JMKk9QEXh3Bdhi73_U27MZ3fh39Bwci_gJtXUhE</recordid><startdate>20180806</startdate><enddate>20180806</enddate><creator>Hirschmann, Nancy J</creator><general>Cornell University Press</general><scope/></search><sort><creationdate>20180806</creationdate><title>Afterword</title><author>Hirschmann, Nancy J</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-j739-b9ade095d5dce25e12b02a03b6237d6a64da8b073f474b70291934e706beaa753</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>book_chapters</rsrctype><prefilter>book_chapters</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2018</creationdate><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Hirschmann, Nancy J</creatorcontrib></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Hirschmann, Nancy J</au><format>book</format><genre>bookitem</genre><ristype>CHAP</ristype><atitle>Afterword: Democracy, Difference, and Deconstruction</atitle><btitle>Rethinking Obligation</btitle><date>2018-08-06</date><risdate>2018</risdate><spage>296</spage><epage>342</epage><pages>296-342</pages><isbn>0801423090</isbn><isbn>9780801423093</isbn><eisbn>1501725645</eisbn><eisbn>9781501725647</eisbn><abstract>A theory of feminist obligation requires us to attend to the political context for obligations, and that context requires participation, communication, and interpersonal relationship as the model for political community. I admit that this “conclusion” may seem somewhat inconclusive to many readers, not all of them traditional or mainstream. Describing the context for obligation may be interesting and useful, but it is still not the same as developing a theory of obligation such as consent theory. If obligation is given, what are those obligationsto? What are myexactpolitical obligations in any given situation? In any given relationship? In</abstract><cop>Ithaca, NY</cop><pub>Cornell University Press</pub><doi>10.7591/9781501725647-009</doi><tpages>47</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISBN: 0801423090
ispartof Rethinking Obligation, 2018, p.296-342
issn
language eng
recordid cdi_walterdegruyter_books_10_7591_9781501725647_009
source Project MUSE Open Access Books; De Gruyter Open Access Books; OAPEN; DOAB: Directory of Open Access Books
title Afterword: Democracy, Difference, and Deconstruction
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-29T16%3A46%3A58IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_walte&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=bookitem&rft.atitle=Afterword:%20Democracy,%20Difference,%20and%20Deconstruction&rft.btitle=Rethinking%20Obligation&rft.au=Hirschmann,%20Nancy%20J&rft.date=2018-08-06&rft.spage=296&rft.epage=342&rft.pages=296-342&rft.isbn=0801423090&rft.isbn_list=9780801423093&rft_id=info:doi/10.7591/9781501725647-009&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_walte%3E10.7591/j.ctv3mt9x3.11%3C/jstor_walte%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft.eisbn=1501725645&rft.eisbn_list=9781501725647&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_jstor_id=10.7591/j.ctv3mt9x3.11&rfr_iscdi=true