Advance Search

To speak is to fight: war as structure of thought in Lyotard’s postmodern condition

war as structure of thought in Lyotard’s postmodern condition

Stefan Sonderling
University of South Africa
Keywords:
Copyright and Licensing:
Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

Share:

How to Cite

To speak is to fight: war as structure of thought in Lyotard’s postmodern condition. (2022). Communicare: Journal for Communication Studies in Africa, 32(2), 1-19. https://doi.org/10.36615/jcsa.v32i2.1629
Crossref
Scopus
Google Scholar
Europe PMC
  • Articles
  • Submited: October 15, 2022
  • Published: October 17, 2022

Abstract

This article, as part of a larger study on the role of war as the primary and primordial formative
mechanism of human thought and communication, investigates the functions of war in the
thinking of postmodern philosopher Jean-Francois Lyotard. It is argued that the central idea
that provides the structuring framework for Lyotard’s theory of communication is the concept of
agonistics that is derived from Heraclitus’ assertion that war is the father of all things. Against
the prevailing hegemony of the pacifist bias in poststructuralist social theories, Lyotard returns
language to its pragmatic origin in the war-like agonistic and combative social reality. Lyotard’s
insight that acts of speaking in society resemble fighting facilitates a better understanding of the
contemporary postmodern global world that resembles a return of the neomedieval condition,
which was characterised by perfect communication and warfare.

Pdf
Pdf

Article Metrics Graph

Article Views | PDF Downloads
Chart Graph | Range Graph

References

  1. Get persistent links for your reference list or bibliography.
  2. Copy and paste the list, we’ll match with our metadata and return the links.
  3. Members may also deposit reference lists here to.
  4. Barthes, R. (1986a). The pleasure of the text. New York: Hill and Wang.
  5. -. (1986b). The rustle of language. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
  6. Baudrillard, J. (1995). The Gulf war did not take place. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
  7. Bell, D.A. (2008). The first total war: Napoleon's Europe and the birth of modern warfare. London: Bloomsbury.
  8. Best, S. & Kellner, D. (1991). Postmodern theory: critical interrogations. New York: Guilford Press. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-21718-2
  9. Bourdieu, P. (1977). Outline of a theory of practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511812507
  10. Bull, H. (1995). The anarchical society: a study of order in world politics. 2nd ed. London: Macmillan.
  11. Bushman, D. (1998). "A conversation of gestures": George Herbert Mead's pragmatic theory of language. Rhetoric Review, 16 (2), 253-267.
  12. https://doi.org/10.1080/07350199809389095
  13. Cerny, P.G. (2005). Terrorism and the new security dilemma. Naval War College Review, 58 (1),11-33.
  14. Clausewitz, C von. (1985). On war. Harmondsworth: Penguin.
  15. Coker, C. (1994). War and the 20th century: A study of war and modern consciousness. London: Brassey.
  16. Deibert, R.J. (1997). 'Exorcismus theoriae': pragmatism, metaphor and the return of the medieval in IR theory. European Journal of International Relations, 3 (2), 167-192. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354066197003002002
  17. Deleuze, G. & Guattari, F. (1986). Nomadology: the war machine. Translated by B. Massumi. New York: Semiotext(e).
  18. Derrida, J. (2001). Violence and metaphysics: an essay on the thought of Emmanuel Levinas. In J. Derrida, Writing and difference (pp. 97-192). London: Routledge.
  19. -. (2005). The politics of friendship. London: Verso.
  20. Eco, U. (1987). Travels in hyperreality. London: Picador.
  21. Farb, P. (1974). Word play: what happens when people talk. London: Coronet Books.
  22. Foucault, M. (2003). Society must be defended: Lectures at the College de France 1975-76. London: Allen Lane.
  23. Friedrich, J. (2001). The meaning of new medievalism. European Journal of International Relations, 7 (4), 475-502.
  24. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354066101007004004
  25. Gasché, R. (2000). Saving the honor of thinking: on Jean-François Lyotard. Parallax, 6 (4), 127-145.nhttps://doi.org/10.1080/13534640050212680
  26. Gray, J. (2004). Al Qaeda and what it means to be modern. London: Faber and Faber.
  27. Hardt, M. & Negri, A. (2006). Multitude: war and democracy in the age of empire. London: Penguin.
  28. Kaplan, R.D. (2003). Warrior politics: why leadership demands a pagan ethos. New York: Vintage Books.
  29. Kobrin, S.J. (1998). Back to the future: neomedievalism and the postmodern digital world economy. Journal of International Affairs, 51 (2), 361-386.
  30. Kuhn, T.S. (1970). The structure of scientific revolutions, 2nd ed. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
  31. Latour, B. (1987). Science in action. London: Milton Keynes, Open University Press.
  32. -. (1993). We have never been modern. New York: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
  33. Lyotard, J-F. (1984). The postmodern condition: A report on knowledge. Manchester: Manchester University Press.
  34. https://doi.org/10.2307/1772278
  35. -. (1988). The different: phrases in dispute. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
  36. -. (1991). The inhuman: reflection on time. Cambridge: Polity.
  37. -. (1986/1987). Rules and paradoxes and svelte appendix. Cultural Critique, 5, 209-219.nhttps://doi.org/10.2307/1354362
  38. -. (1997). Postmodern fables. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
  39. Lyotard, J-F. & Thébaud, J-L. (1989). Just gaming. Minneapolis, MN.: University of Minnesota Press.
  40. Mattelart, A. (1994). Mapping world communication: war, progress, culture. Minneapolis, MN.: University of Minnesota Press.
  41. McLuhan, M. (1969). Understanding media: the extension of man. London: Sphere Books.
  42. Mead, G.H. (1965). On social psychology: selected papers. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  43. Meltzer, B.N., Petras, J.W. & Reynolds, L.T. (1980). Symbolic interactionism: genesis, varieties and criticism. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
  44. Meyrowitz, J. (1986). No sense of place: the impact of electronic media on social behavior. New York: Oxford University Press.
  45. Mouffe, C. (1993). The return of the political. London: Verso.
  46. -. (2000). The democratic paradox. London: Verso.
  47. -. (2005). On the political. Abingdon: Routledge.
  48. Norris, C. (1992). Uncritical theory: postmodernism, intellectuals & the Gulf war. Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press.
  49. Ong, W.J. (1982). Orality and literacy: The technologizing of the word. London: Methuen.
  50. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203328064
  51. -. (1989). Fighting for life: contest, sexuality, and consciousness. Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press.
  52. Pagliai, V. (2009). The art of dueling with words: toward a new understanding of verbal duels across the world. Oral Tradition, 24 (1), 61-88.
  53. https://doi.org/10.1353/ort.0.0054
  54. -. (2010). Conflict, cooperation, and facework in Contrasto verbal duels. Journal of Linguistic Anthropology, 20 (1), 87-100.
  55. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1548-1395.2010.01050.x
  56. Parks, W. (1986). Flyting and fighting: pathways in the realisation of the epic contest. Neophilologus, 70, 292-306. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00553323
  57. -. (1990). Verbal duelling in heroic narrative: the Homeric and old English tradition. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.
  58. Pêcheux, M. (1978). Are the masses an inanimate object? In D. Sankoff (Ed.). Linguistic variations: models and methods (pp. 251-266). New York: Academic Press.
  59. Peters, J.D. (1989). John Lock, the individual, and the origin of communication. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 75 (4), 387-399.
  60. https://doi.org/10.1080/00335638909383886
  61. Poster, M. (1990). The modes of information: poststructuralism and social context. Cambridge: Polity.
  62. Richards, P. (2006). An accidental sect: how war made belief in Sierra Leone. Review of African Political Economy, 110, 651-663.
  63. https://doi.org/10.1080/03056240601119042
  64. Ricoeur, P. (1977). The model of text: meaningful action considered as text. In F.R. Dallmayr & T.A.
  65. McCarthy (Eds), Understanding and social inquiry (pp. 316-334). Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame.
  66. Schmitt, C. (1976). The concept of the political. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press.
  67. Sonderling, S. (1994). An exploration of poststructuralist discursive critique and its implication for the study of communication. Communicatio, 20 (2), 9-24. https://doi.org/10.1080/02500169408537975
  68. -. (2008). What if morality should turn out to be the danger of dangers? Global ethics terrorism and the growth of ignorance. Communicatio, 34 (2), 290-327. https://doi.org/10.1080/02500160802456213
  69. -. (2009). Psychoanalysis and television, in P.J. Fourie (Ed.), Media studies: volume 3: media content and media audiences (pp. 580-599). Cape Town: Juta.
  70. -. (2012a). Communication is war by other means: a new perspective on war and communication in the thought of twentieth century selected communication scholars. Unpublished Doctoral thesis, University of South Africa, Pretoria.
  71. -. (2012b). Eternal peace of the graveyard: the language of peace discourse and the construction of the global humanitarian concentration camp. Communicatio, 38 (1), 64-83. https://doi.org/10.1080/02500167.2011.627566
  72. Urry, J. (2002). The global complexities of September 11th. Theory, Culture & Society, 19 (4), 57-69. https://doi.org/10.1177/0263276402019004004
  73. Wittgenstein, L. (1988). Philosophical investigations. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
How to Cite
To speak is to fight: war as structure of thought in Lyotard’s postmodern condition. (2022). Communicare: Journal for Communication Studies in Africa, 32(2), 1-19. https://doi.org/10.36615/jcsa.v32i2.1629

Send mail to Author

Send Cancel

Custom technologies based on your needs

  • ORCID
  • Crossref
  • PubMed
    • Clarivate