This chapter centers on the role of language in an understanding of democratic politics. It focuses on a reinterpretation of Rancière's critical reading of Aristotle. Aristotle claims that we can distinguish the human animal from all others because the former possesses speech (logos) while the latter has only voice (phone), and it is, for Aristotle, exactly the possession of logos that makes the human animal a political animal. Rancière agrees, but also disagrees: he shows that the phone/logos cannot simply determine what is political, since the distinction itself can only be drawn politically. The chapter makes the case for a radically important non-anthropocentric understanding of language in Rancière. Along the way, this chapter also shows that Rancière's most important text in English translation, Disagreement, has actually been significantly mistranslated in its opening lines—at just the point that Rancière offers his crucial interpretation of Aristotle.
Oxford Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.
If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.