Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Nothing Resists Modernity: On Takeuchi Yoshimi's "Kindai Towa Nanika"

Nothing Resists Modernity: On Takeuchi Yoshimi's "Kindai Towa Nanika" positions 8:2 Fall 2000 that it contains within it the conditions of impossibility of subjectivity as well. Here one must confront the radical implications of this insight for our understanding of history. The elusive movement or force of history cannot be domesticated by a historiography that insists on taking as its object of research the subject, which poses itself in all its unity and integrity. Viewing history as a history of subjects (for example, Japanese history, Chinese history) reveals that the empiricity that is the domain of historiography is in fact contained within, or subsumed under, the ideal unit that is the individual subject. As Takeuchi suggests, this understanding of history is inescapably theoretical; that is, it is based on the primacy of vision (theoria), regardless of course of whether historiography consciously recognizes this character or not. What disturbs this traditional relationship in historiography between the subject and history may here be understood as historicity, according to which the subject’s thoroughly historical being reveals not the activity of its formation but rather its fundamental passivity in the world. This passivity, let us emphasize, is originary. Before the subject assumes its proper unity qua subject, then, it is necessarily http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png positions asia critique Duke University Press

Nothing Resists Modernity: On Takeuchi Yoshimi's "Kindai Towa Nanika"

positions asia critique , Volume 8 (2) – Sep 1, 2000

Loading next page...
 
/lp/duke-university-press/nothing-resists-modernity-on-takeuchi-yoshimi-s-kindai-towa-nanika-CR4y82oD6N
Publisher
Duke University Press
Copyright
Copyright 2000 by Duke University Press
ISSN
1067-9847
eISSN
1527-8271
DOI
10.1215/10679847-8-2-317
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

positions 8:2 Fall 2000 that it contains within it the conditions of impossibility of subjectivity as well. Here one must confront the radical implications of this insight for our understanding of history. The elusive movement or force of history cannot be domesticated by a historiography that insists on taking as its object of research the subject, which poses itself in all its unity and integrity. Viewing history as a history of subjects (for example, Japanese history, Chinese history) reveals that the empiricity that is the domain of historiography is in fact contained within, or subsumed under, the ideal unit that is the individual subject. As Takeuchi suggests, this understanding of history is inescapably theoretical; that is, it is based on the primacy of vision (theoria), regardless of course of whether historiography consciously recognizes this character or not. What disturbs this traditional relationship in historiography between the subject and history may here be understood as historicity, according to which the subject’s thoroughly historical being reveals not the activity of its formation but rather its fundamental passivity in the world. This passivity, let us emphasize, is originary. Before the subject assumes its proper unity qua subject, then, it is necessarily

Journal

positions asia critiqueDuke University Press

Published: Sep 1, 2000

There are no references for this article.