Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-lj6df Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T22:40:34.769Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

‘Religion’, Genealogy, History: A Reply to Zucca and Monod

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 February 2012

NATHANIEL BERMAN
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

I thank the Leiden Journal of International Law for this opportunity to address the provocative responses by Jean-Claude Monod and Lorenzo Zucca to ‘The Sacred Conspiracy’. In this short reply, I seek to clarify some misapprehensions, as well as to sharpen the differences between us.

Type
INTERNATIONAL LEGAL THEORY
Information
Leiden Journal of International Law , Volume 25 , Issue 1 , March 2012 , pp. 73 - 76
Copyright
Copyright © Foundation of the Leiden Journal of International Law 2012

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Foucault, M., ‘Nietzsche, la généalogie, l'histoire’, in Bachelard, S. et al. , Hommage à Jean Hyppolite (1971), 145Google Scholar (my translation).

2 Breton, A., ‘Preface to the Max Ernst Exhibition of May, 1921’, quoted in Ernst, M., Beyond Painting (translated by Tanning, D.) (1948), 21Google Scholar.

3 Foucault, supra note 1.

4 Ibid., at 158.

5 Ibid.

6 Ibid., at 160.

7 Ibid., at 146.

8 Ibid., at 148.

9 I wrote: ‘This homology is close enough to suggest that the two sets of dichotomies may be viewed, respectively, as anthropologized and historicized versions of very similar notions.’ Zucca seems to think that I am here referring to the relationship between the two forms of secularization; in fact, however, I am referring to the relationship between two dichotomies: (i) secularization-retreat versus secularization transfer; and (ii) the Durkheimian opposition of the absolute heterogeneity of the sacred and the profane versus the contagiousness of the relationship between the sacred and the profane.

10 Foucault, supra note 1, at 168.