Paulina Ochoa Espejo
Haverford, Political Science, Faculty Member
The idea of " The People " motivates populist politics, but scholars are often skeptical that it can justify the populists' claims. Who then are " The People " that both populists and democrats invoke? This article describes the logical... more
The idea of " The People " motivates populist politics, but scholars are often skeptical that it can justify the populists' claims. Who then are " The People " that both populists and democrats invoke? This article describes the logical paradoxes that arise when defining a democratic people, and a long-standing debate on the nature and function of the demos in a democracy. These show that scholars' definitions and judgments of populism depend on whether they conceive of The People as a historical fact (as populists do) or as a hypothetical ideal for guiding legislation (the liberals' view). The article proposes instead an account of the democratic " people as process. " This account explains why populists betray the democratic ideals they claim to endorse.
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Bergson(ism) Remembered: A Roundtable Curated by Mark William Westmoreland with Brien Karas (Villanova University, USA) Featuring Jimena Canales (University of Illinois-UC, USA), Stephen Crocker (Memorial University of Newfoundland,... more
Bergson(ism) Remembered: A Roundtable
Curated by Mark William Westmoreland with Brien Karas (Villanova University, USA)
Featuring Jimena Canales (University of Illinois-UC, USA), Stephen Crocker (Memorial University of Newfoundland, Canada), Charlotte De Mille (The Courtauld Gallery, UK), Souleymane Bachir Diagne (Columbia University, USA), Michael Foley (University of Westminster, UK), Hisashi Fujita (Kyushu Sangyo University, Japan), Suzanne Guerlac (University of California, Berkeley, USA), Melissa McMahon (Independent Scholar, Australia), Paulina Ochoa Espejo (Haverford College, USA), and Frédéric Worms (L’École Normale Supérieure, France)
Curated by Mark William Westmoreland with Brien Karas (Villanova University, USA)
Featuring Jimena Canales (University of Illinois-UC, USA), Stephen Crocker (Memorial University of Newfoundland, Canada), Charlotte De Mille (The Courtauld Gallery, UK), Souleymane Bachir Diagne (Columbia University, USA), Michael Foley (University of Westminster, UK), Hisashi Fujita (Kyushu Sangyo University, Japan), Suzanne Guerlac (University of California, Berkeley, USA), Melissa McMahon (Independent Scholar, Australia), Paulina Ochoa Espejo (Haverford College, USA), and Frédéric Worms (L’École Normale Supérieure, France)
Research Interests: History, Cultural Studies, Physics, French Literature, Philosophy, and 17 moreMetaphysics, Aesthetics, Political Philosophy, Epistemology, Art History, Technology, Translation Studies, Social Sciences, History of Science, Political Science, Continental Philosophy, United Nations, Contemporary French Philosophy, Biology, Henri Bergson, Democracy, and Bergson
If democracy is rule by the people, and populism appeals to the people for legitimacy, how can we distinguish a populist movement from one seeking to establish a liberal democracy? Existing conceptions of populism in political science can... more
If democracy is rule by the people, and populism appeals to the people for legitimacy, how can we distinguish a populist movement from one seeking to establish a liberal democracy? Existing conceptions of populism in political science can distinguish the two within stable electoral systems; but they cannot do so during constitutional crises. This paper offers a new lens for examining populism in crisis situations. By examining recent debates on the nature and composition of the people, the paper proposes a different criterion of demarcation between populism and liberal democracy: self-limitation. Populists, I argue, defend their policies by claiming that the people wants them. By contrast, liberal democrats also appeal to the people, but only to signal that their claims are fallible, and thus to limit the reach of their claims. The paper illustrates the thesis by applying the criterion to the contested 2006 elections in Mexico.
Research Interests:
Review of The Ethics of Immigration
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
What today divides Continental from analytical philosophy? This paper argues that the present divide is not what it once was. Today, the divide concerns the styles in which philosophers deal with intellectual problems: solving them,... more
What today divides Continental from analytical philosophy? This paper argues that the present divide is not what it once was. Today, the divide concerns the styles in which philosophers deal with intellectual problems: solving them, pressing them, resolving them, or dissolving them. To show this, we argue for two theses. First, the difference between most Continental and most analytical philosophers today is that Continental philosophers find intelligible two styles of dealing with problems that most analytical philosophers find unintelligible: pressing them and resolving them. Second, when it comes to a genuine divide in which incomprehension of the other side’s basic philosophical purposes combines with disagreement on fundamental questions of doctrine, the only such divide today is that between those Continental philosophers who tend to press problems (roughly, the heirs of Derrida) and those analytical philosophers who tend to solve problems. It is among these sub-groups that there is a real philosophical divide today. So the analytical-Continental difference is more a matter of style than of substance: but as we try to show, differences in style shape differences over substance.
Research Interests: Metaphilosophy, (Post-)Analytic Philosophy, Continental (vs.) Analytical Philosophy, Contemporary continental political philosophy, Philosophical Methodology, and 5 moreDiscussion of how distinctively philosophical problems are formulated and addressed; not a survey of philosophical issues but an exploration of their character and significance, and philosophical method., Analytic Political Philosophy, History of Analytical Philosophy, Logic of Inquiry, and History of Continental Philosophy
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
"Journal of French and Francophone Philosophy - Revue de la philosophie française et de langue française", Vol XXIV, No 2 (2016), p. 221-258. Curated by Mark William Westmoreland with Brien Karas (Villanova University, USA) Featuring... more
"Journal of French and Francophone Philosophy - Revue de la philosophie française et de langue française", Vol XXIV, No 2 (2016), p. 221-258.
Curated by Mark William Westmoreland with Brien Karas (Villanova University, USA)
Featuring Jimena Canales (University of Illinois-UC, USA), Stephen Crocker (Memorial University of Newfoundland, Canada), Charlotte De Mille (The Courtauld Gallery, UK), Souleymane Bachir Diagne (Columbia University, USA), Michael Foley (University of Westminster, UK), Hisashi Fujita (Kyushu Sangyo University, Japan), Suzanne Guerlac (University of California, Berkeley, USA), Melissa McMahon (Independent Scholar, Australia), Paulina Ochoa Espejo (Haverford College, USA), and Frédéric Worms (L’École Normale Supérieure, France)
Curated by Mark William Westmoreland with Brien Karas (Villanova University, USA)
Featuring Jimena Canales (University of Illinois-UC, USA), Stephen Crocker (Memorial University of Newfoundland, Canada), Charlotte De Mille (The Courtauld Gallery, UK), Souleymane Bachir Diagne (Columbia University, USA), Michael Foley (University of Westminster, UK), Hisashi Fujita (Kyushu Sangyo University, Japan), Suzanne Guerlac (University of California, Berkeley, USA), Melissa McMahon (Independent Scholar, Australia), Paulina Ochoa Espejo (Haverford College, USA), and Frédéric Worms (L’École Normale Supérieure, France)