Christopher Fynsk critiques Carl Schmitt's concept of a "nomos of the earth". Fynsk argues that Schmitt's definition of nomos as originating from land distribution is problematic and remains abstract. Fynsk also claims that Schmitt fails to consider the "earth" beyond a physical medium for commerce and war. Overall, Fynsk believes Schmitt's concept of nomos lacks truth and forecloses on crucial dimensions of political thinking in the post-metaphysical era.
The Crest-Wave of Evolution
A Course of Lectures in History, Given to the Graduates' Class in the Raja-Yoga College, Point Loma, in the College-Year 1918-19
The Crest-Wave of Evolution A Course of Lectures in History, Given To The Graduates' Class in The Raja-Yoga College, Point Loma, in The College-Year 1918-19 by Morris, Kenneth, 1879-1937
Emergency Government Within The Bounds of The Constitution, An Introduction To Carl Schmitt, ''The Dictatorship of The Reich President According To Art. 48 R.V.'' - Ellen Kennedy
Christopher Fynsk critiques Carl Schmitt's concept of a "nomos of the earth". Fynsk argues that Schmitt's definition of nomos as originating from land distribution is problematic and remains abstract. Fynsk also claims that Schmitt fails to consider the "earth" beyond a physical medium for commerce and war. Overall, Fynsk believes Schmitt's concept of nomos lacks truth and forecloses on crucial dimensions of political thinking in the post-metaphysical era.
Christopher Fynsk critiques Carl Schmitt's concept of a "nomos of the earth". Fynsk argues that Schmitt's definition of nomos as originating from land distribution is problematic and remains abstract. Fynsk also claims that Schmitt fails to consider the "earth" beyond a physical medium for commerce and war. Overall, Fynsk believes Schmitt's concept of nomos lacks truth and forecloses on crucial dimensions of political thinking in the post-metaphysical era.
Christopher Fynsk critiques Carl Schmitt's concept of a "nomos of the earth". Fynsk argues that Schmitt's definition of nomos as originating from land distribution is problematic and remains abstract. Fynsk also claims that Schmitt fails to consider the "earth" beyond a physical medium for commerce and war. Overall, Fynsk believes Schmitt's concept of nomos lacks truth and forecloses on crucial dimensions of political thinking in the post-metaphysical era.
I will concentiate ny lew liiel notes on Cail Schnitts notion ol a nomos ol the eaith. I diead the thought that such a iegiessive concept could nd cuiiency in the acadenic naiket. But while I see little ieason to hope that ciitical vigilance night delay its application, I cannot avoid oeiing a lew woids ol advance piotest. I nust also acknowledge that ny laniliaiity with Schnitts oeuvie is linited, so I will addiess nysell solely to the aigunentation ol The Nonos of the Earth. 1 This is a signicant linitation, since an inpoitant pait ol Schnitts call loi a new nomos ienains vague and unstated. In the pages ol the appendix in which Schnitt applauds Pizywaias analysis ol powei in Humanitas, we aie told, ist, and with enphasis, that powei is the seciet sinistei end (6). It is dicult not to piesune that a veil ol seciecy utteis ovei nuch ol Schnitts piesentation since it is, at once, so insistent in its declaiations and so inconpletely developed (paiticulaily as iegaids the political context ol the decade ol its conpo- sition). One senses quickly that we nust iead letween nany lines to seek the lineanents ol a sinistei design. I conless that I have had neithei the heait noi the tine to undeitake the The South Atlantic Quarterly oq:z, Spiing zoo. Copyiight _ zoo ly Duke Univeisity Piess. 314 Christopher Fynsk lackgiound woik necessaiy loi this task. So I will addiess nysell solely to the stated theses ol the volune. What I glinpse appeais sinistei lecause the use ol the notion ol nomos lelies its denition. Nomos is a concept ol oiigin that Schnitt seeks to oppose to the alstiact nediations ol adninisteied authoiity. He aigues explicitly that it cannot le nade to seive the noinative powei ol the given (;). And yet Schnitt appeais to have done piecisely this ly desciiling the Euiopean land appiopiiation in the age ol discoveiy in its teins. I ienain unconvinced that his concept ol ontological loundations canle placed at the oiigin ol the acconnodations that pioduced the jus publicum Europaeumin a division letween Euiope and the NewWoild. Only when Schnitt sketches the legal ustication ol land appiopiiation does one glinpse a possille us- tication loi the appeal to nomos. 2 But at this point, Schnitt desciiles a conguiation ol Westein iationality whose eneigence and unlolding quite exceed the events ol the age ol discoveiy, howevei nuch it was naiked ly then. 3 I do want to olseive that Schnitts thinking olliges the philosophei to weigh the ontological loice ol the uiidical oidei (oi at least that ol the sovei- eign act ol its loundation). But I do not see that he honois his own clainloi the ontological piioiity ol a uiidical thought guided ly the notion ol nomos as he develops the concept ol the justus hostis (the highest loin ol oidei within the scope ol hunan powei [8;|). As loi the notion ol nomos itsell, I would have to agiee with those ciitics (whon Schnitt disnisses) who sug- gest that the enphasis on land distiilution in the oiiginal sense ol the woid intioduces an aichaisn. Land distiilution is unthinkalle apait lion a topology ol Being. When Heideggei aigues in a peihaps ielated nannei that the Gieek notion ol ousia is deiived lionthe Gieek notion ol piopeity, he does not uige that the Gieek essence deiives lionpiopeity, lut iathei that the lattei deiives lionthe Gieek expeiience ol Being, whichinvolves an undeistanding ol pioduction. Land distiilution is unthinkalle apait lion a topology ol Being and cannot le thought as its giounding deteinination. I cannot help lut piesune, also, that the notion ol land distiilution itsell iequiies nuch noie developnent, since Schnitt gives so little attention to the possille nomoi ol nonadic peoples. But even il we sonehow giant Schnitt his insistence on land appiopiia- tion (puisuing the thought, peihaps, that no topology ol Being is achieved without a diawing ol loundaiies in Schnitts sense, even il the ielation ol the lattei to the loinei cannot le desciiled as one ol deteinination), we A Nonos without Truth 315 nust olseive that his denition ol this oiiginaiy act leaves the earth quite out ol account except as a physical nediunloi conneice and wai. I do not think that one can speak ol a conciete ontological oidei altei Heideggei without enteitaining the question ol the eaith as Heideggei undeistands it. Sone night pielei to tuin to othei souices, such as contenpoiaiy woik in ecology. But I an inclined to naintain this ieleience to Heideggei to sug- gest that Schnitts concept ol nomos lacks tiuth in the sense ol the teinthat Heideggei sought to liing loith when he insciiled the ielation ol woild and eaith in that ol the concealing and unconcealing ol tiuth (notions he took lion the Gieek aletheia). Schnitt ieluses the nomos[physis opposition supposedly lecause this iendeis nomos a loinal inposition, lut Schnitts essential piollen heie is that he has no thought ol physis leyond that pio- vided ly nodein iationality. 4 To suggest pait ol what is at stake in this last point, I iecall Reinei Schuinanns discussion in Le principe danarchie ol the epochal piinciple, undeistood as loth piincipiun (the loundation in ieason) and princips, the authoiity that iendeis ustice. 5 Eveiy usticatoiy ieason ol an epoch has its tine, its eneigence and passing, Schuinann says, and is sulect to a genealogical account that piovides its arche, its leginning and con- nandnent, and the ieign ol its piincipiun[princips. But genealogy today, he adds, nust also take into account a thiid dinension uniecognized ly Schnittnanely, an epochs Ursprung, the event in which Being cones to piesence in this epochal oidei. 6 This dinension ol the tiuth ol any epochal oidei cones to sight loi us now, at the end ol that seiies ol epochal detei- ninations ol Being oi nomoi Heideggei teined netaphysics. Today, in this postnetaphysical tine when we can think the destinal oi Geschick- lich chaiactei ol nomos as assignnent, 7 we can legin to think the eaith as iiieducilly pait ol a peoples woild (oi any loin ol lile, il one pieleis the Wittgensteinian concept), and we can legin to think the woild nultiply. We can peihaps even appioach a cosnopolitan undeistanding ol woild in the sense Heideggei pointed to in taking this notion ovei lion Kant. Schnitts desciiption ol the nomos ienains alstiact and easily appiopiiated ly a netaphysically oideied (i.e., lollowing the Aiistotelian pros hen) loun- dational thinking. As I have suggested, to think the nomos without ieleience to the Ursprung is to ienain solidly within the closuie ol netaphysics, that is, within an epochal peispective that lails to iecognize the end ol netaphysics. Now, one night say that Schnitts eoit to think the political without appeal to 316 Christopher Fynsk univeisal loundations alieady nakes such a chaige tiivial. And peihaps we should sinply look past his questionalle philosophical clains in seeking to desciile the nomos in ontological teins. I nay le taking his title concept lai too seiiously. But I lelieve it nust still le said that his concept loiecloses ciucial dinensions ol what nust le thought in the coning conguiations ol the eaith. Today, theoiists aie incieasingly piepaied to acknowledge the inpeiative ol the pluial and local thinking iequiied ly poststiuctuialist nodels. But they also tend to hedge this acknowledgnent. We nust nevertheless, they say, attenpt to think the glolal sociopolitical oidei in its systenic naniles- tations. They then pioceed to loiget those poststiuctuialist exigencies and ieveit to the oidei ol iepiesentation and the position ol a tianscendental (theoietical) sulectivity. Theoiies ol enpiie, loi exanple, aie delated loi theii neiit without a penetiating exanination ol the netaphysical position taken in such theoiizing. I do not lelieve that signicant piogiess has leen nade in noie than a lew isolated quaiteis in nding ways ol honoiing the exigencies ol postnetaphysical thinking while puisuing a ciitique ol the tiiply iational language ol econony, politics, and technique (to use Giaid Gianels phiase). 8 I do not undeiestinate the innensity ol the task, lut I woiiy that Schnitts pioect will induce us to loiget the exigencies to which I have ieleiied. Notes Cail Schnitt, The Nonos of the Earth in the International Law of the ]us Pullicun Euio- paeun, tians. G. L. Ulnen (New Yoik: Telos, zoo). Sulsequent ieleiences will appeai in the lody ol the essay. z Discoveiies weie nade without piioi peinission ol the discoveied. Thus, legal title to discoveiies lay in a highei legitinacy. They could le nade only ly peoples intellectually and histoiically advanced enough to appiehend the discoveied ly supeiioi knowledge and consciousness. Euiopean discoveiy ol a newwoild in the lteenth and sixteenth cen- tuiies thus did not occui ly chance and was not sinply one ol nany successlul canpaigns ol conquest in woild histoiy. Neithei was it a ust wai in any noinative sense. Rathei, it was an achievenent ol newly awakened Occidental iationalisn, the pioduct ol an intel- lectual and scientic cultuie that aiose in the Euiopean Middle Ages, with the necessaiy assistance ol systens ol thought that had ieconstituted classical Euiopean and Aialic thinking in Chiistian teins, and had nolded it into a gieat histoiical powei. Continuing to discuss the connon Euiopean legal title ol discoveiy, Schnitt notes that a scientic caitogiaphical suivey was a tiue legal title to a terra incognita (z). Might the incoheience at this point sinply deiive lion Schnitts philosophical clain iegaiding the lasic chaiactei ol land division loi the nomos ol a people? Sone such philo- sophical extiavagance nay le at woik, lut I an inclined to think, as I noted alove, that A Nonos without Truth 317 othei designs ol appiopiiation have shaped the denition ol nomos itsell (the notion eneiged inSchnitts woik, altei all, to ustily Nazi clains), and that he ultinately appeals to this concept to ustily acts ol powei in the nannei he assigns to Callicles in Platos dialogue (;). q A lull consideiation ol this piollen would also have to addiess itsell to Schnitts clain that a tiue nomos ol the eaiththat is, one that is tiuly glolaleneiges only in the age ol discoveiy. Reinei Schuinann, Le principe danarchie (Paiis: Galile, 8z). Tianslations lion this edition aie ny own. 6 To illustiate the neaning ol the teins he uses to dene his genealogical pioect, Schui- nanntakes the exanple ol the Inca Enpiie and the institutionol its nomos inthe aichitec- tuial design ol Cuzco. I cannot cite all ol Schuinanns delighted account ol the visilility ol this oidei, lut I will cite the paiagiaph that concludes his desciiption ol the enlodi- nent ol the princips (heie, the authoiity ol the ieigning class, the Inca, synlolized ly the guie ol the puna), and the piinciple ol intelligilility, the piincipiun, which was an aiithnetical systen: The arche, as leginning ol this systen, was the giandiose pioect loined ly the ist Inca, Pachacuti . . . , the arche, as connandnent, was autociacy. The piinciple ol this civilization is also nanilest: as ist in the oidei ol authoiity, theie was the political appaiatus, and, at its head, exeicising veitical contiol, the supiene cacique, as ist in the oidei ol intelligilility oi iationality, it was the decinal systen. Eveiy detail ol lile was sulnitted to aiithnetical laws in view ol pacication, expansion, agiicultuial giowth, delense, and woiks. The Incan enpiie could le pan-Andean lecause it was a systen, a pyianid with a decagonal lase. Thus, the oiigin ol this systen, undeistood as arche and as piinciple, peinits us to undeistand this society and its exploits. At the sane tine, we nust adnit that we do not undeistand anything alout it. And this is due not only to the alsence ol an Incan wiiting. The arche and piinciple do not say eveiything alout the oiigin, do not lully say the oiigin. They do not allow us to undeistand how things weie piesent to eveiyday expeiience. The oiigin, as loth arche and piinciple, dis- sinulates piesence. Howthings weie piesent leloie the aiiival ol the conquistadois will escape us loievei (Le principe danarchie, qoq). Schuinann concludes this passage ly noting that a thought ol the oiigin will iequiie a tuin in oui nannei ol thinking. ; I ielei heie to Heideggeis denition ol the tein in The Lettei on Hunanisn, in Basic Writings, ed. David Faiiell Kiell (New Yoik: HaipeiCollins, ), z6z: In Gieek, to assign is nemein. Nonos is not only law lut noie oiiginally the assignnent contained in the dispensation ol Being. Only the assignnent is capalle ol dispatching nan into Being. Only such dispatching is capalle ol suppoiting and olligating. Otheiwise all law ienains neiely sonething laliicated ly hunan ieason. One night say that nomos is a destiny loi us now that we can think the end ol the epochs ol nomoi. Following Deiiida, we night say that the task is now to think nomos as destination. (On this topic, see Dei- iidas essay Coups denvoi, in Du droit la philosophie [Paiis: Galile, o|, ;;68.) Needless to say, Schnitts undeistanding ol nomos lalls lai shoit ol this posthunanist, postnetaphysical undeistanding ol the lounding act. 8 I have discussed Gianels extiaoidinaiy eoit to answei loth denands in an active ciiti- cal piactice in The Claim of Language: A Case for the Humanities (Minneapolis: Univeisity ol Minnesota Piess, zooq).
The Crest-Wave of Evolution
A Course of Lectures in History, Given to the Graduates' Class in the Raja-Yoga College, Point Loma, in the College-Year 1918-19
The Crest-Wave of Evolution A Course of Lectures in History, Given To The Graduates' Class in The Raja-Yoga College, Point Loma, in The College-Year 1918-19 by Morris, Kenneth, 1879-1937
Emergency Government Within The Bounds of The Constitution, An Introduction To Carl Schmitt, ''The Dictatorship of The Reich President According To Art. 48 R.V.'' - Ellen Kennedy