The power of occlusion

David Jenkins, Steven Lukes

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    Abstract

    The ability to control the terms of debate has powerful consequences for what is and is not considered a valid argument, and what does and does not get taken seriously as a description of the world. In this paper, we focus on the ways in which power is at work to pre-emptively exclude certain ideas and descriptions of relevant phenomena before questions about what should be done about that phenomena can even be asked. We describe this as the power of occlusion. Beginning with Gilbert Ryle’s notion of the category mistake, we go on to consider the various ways that have been employed to understand the market, focusing primarily on the (mutually exclusive) descriptions employed by Friedrich Hayek and Karl Polanyi. The essay ends with a survey of the ways in which unconditional basic income has been occluded from debates surrounding welfare reform, arguing that in order to confront the power of occlusion it is necessary to challenge many of our assumptions surrounding work and reciprocity.

    Original languageEnglish (US)
    Pages (from-to)1-19
    Number of pages19
    JournalJournal of Political Power
    DOIs
    StateAccepted/In press - Feb 14 2017

    Fingerprint

    basic income
    reciprocity
    welfare
    reform
    market
    ability

    Keywords

    • basic income
    • category mistakes
    • controversy
    • credibility
    • Occlusion

    ASJC Scopus subject areas

    • Sociology and Political Science

    Cite this

    The power of occlusion. / Jenkins, David; Lukes, Steven.

    In: Journal of Political Power, 14.02.2017, p. 1-19.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    Jenkins, David ; Lukes, Steven. / The power of occlusion. In: Journal of Political Power. 2017 ; pp. 1-19.
    @article{e14d0fca65a74f7b81e94cf446be683b,
    title = "The power of occlusion",
    abstract = "The ability to control the terms of debate has powerful consequences for what is and is not considered a valid argument, and what does and does not get taken seriously as a description of the world. In this paper, we focus on the ways in which power is at work to pre-emptively exclude certain ideas and descriptions of relevant phenomena before questions about what should be done about that phenomena can even be asked. We describe this as the power of occlusion. Beginning with Gilbert Ryle’s notion of the category mistake, we go on to consider the various ways that have been employed to understand the market, focusing primarily on the (mutually exclusive) descriptions employed by Friedrich Hayek and Karl Polanyi. The essay ends with a survey of the ways in which unconditional basic income has been occluded from debates surrounding welfare reform, arguing that in order to confront the power of occlusion it is necessary to challenge many of our assumptions surrounding work and reciprocity.",
    keywords = "basic income, category mistakes, controversy, credibility, Occlusion",
    author = "David Jenkins and Steven Lukes",
    year = "2017",
    month = "2",
    day = "14",
    doi = "10.1080/2158379X.2017.1285156",
    language = "English (US)",
    pages = "1--19",
    journal = "Journal of Political Power",
    issn = "2158-379X",
    publisher = "Routledge",

    }

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - The power of occlusion

    AU - Jenkins, David

    AU - Lukes, Steven

    PY - 2017/2/14

    Y1 - 2017/2/14

    N2 - The ability to control the terms of debate has powerful consequences for what is and is not considered a valid argument, and what does and does not get taken seriously as a description of the world. In this paper, we focus on the ways in which power is at work to pre-emptively exclude certain ideas and descriptions of relevant phenomena before questions about what should be done about that phenomena can even be asked. We describe this as the power of occlusion. Beginning with Gilbert Ryle’s notion of the category mistake, we go on to consider the various ways that have been employed to understand the market, focusing primarily on the (mutually exclusive) descriptions employed by Friedrich Hayek and Karl Polanyi. The essay ends with a survey of the ways in which unconditional basic income has been occluded from debates surrounding welfare reform, arguing that in order to confront the power of occlusion it is necessary to challenge many of our assumptions surrounding work and reciprocity.

    AB - The ability to control the terms of debate has powerful consequences for what is and is not considered a valid argument, and what does and does not get taken seriously as a description of the world. In this paper, we focus on the ways in which power is at work to pre-emptively exclude certain ideas and descriptions of relevant phenomena before questions about what should be done about that phenomena can even be asked. We describe this as the power of occlusion. Beginning with Gilbert Ryle’s notion of the category mistake, we go on to consider the various ways that have been employed to understand the market, focusing primarily on the (mutually exclusive) descriptions employed by Friedrich Hayek and Karl Polanyi. The essay ends with a survey of the ways in which unconditional basic income has been occluded from debates surrounding welfare reform, arguing that in order to confront the power of occlusion it is necessary to challenge many of our assumptions surrounding work and reciprocity.

    KW - basic income

    KW - category mistakes

    KW - controversy

    KW - credibility

    KW - Occlusion

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85012877531&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85012877531&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    U2 - 10.1080/2158379X.2017.1285156

    DO - 10.1080/2158379X.2017.1285156

    M3 - Article

    AN - SCOPUS:85012877531

    SP - 1

    EP - 19

    JO - Journal of Political Power

    JF - Journal of Political Power

    SN - 2158-379X

    ER -