Recordings from the popular public lecture series featuring new work on all aspects of intellectual history. Hosted by the Institute of Intellectual History at the University of St Andrews.
John Robertson - The Refutation of Natural Law by Sacred History in Giambattista Vico's New Science
Professor John Robertson (Cambridge & St Andrews) delivered this lecture at the University of St Andrews on February 27, 2020. The event was organised by the Institute of Legal and Constitutional Research in collaboration with the Institute of Intellectual History.
Giulia Delogu - The Emporium of Words: Free Ports and Port Cities as Laboratories of Modernity (16th-19th centuries)
Dr Giulia Delogu (Venice) delivered this lecture on February 5th 2020.
Thomas Maissen - Britannia and her sisters in the 16th and 17th centuries: Political Representation and Iconography
Professor Thomas Maissen (Heidelberg/Paris) delivered this lecture on January 28, 2020 at the University of St Andrews.
Ian MacLean - Old wine in new bottles? Hippocrates, the classical tradition and the Early Enlightenment
Professor Ian MacLean (Oxford/St Andrews) delivered this lecture at the Institute of Intellectual History on November 19th 2019.
David Weinstein - Green's Hume
Professor David Weinstein (Wake Forest) delivered this lecture on November 12, 2019 at the University of St Andrews.
Lucia Rubinelli - Sovereignty and Constituent Power in Weimar Germany
Dr Lucia Rubinelli (Cambridge) delivered the 18th István Hont Memorial Lecture on October 29 2019 at the University of St Andrews "This paper is the third chapter of a book manuscript, titled Constituent power: A history. The book mainly focuses on how Sieyes’ first theorisation of pouvoir constituant has been used and misused by subsequent theorists, including Carl Schmitt and Hannah Arendt. In this chapter, I argue that Schmitt theorised constituent power as the democratic embodiment of sovereignty. Schmitt’s collapse of constituent power and sovereignty is well known, but I suggest that he did not simply take the two ideas to be interchangeable. Rather, he aimed to introduce a meaning for popular power that could be consistent with his definition of sovereignty as the power to decide on the exception. This was not provided by ideas of national and parliamentary sovereignty. The latter gave birth to liberal parliamentarianism, which he accused of dissolving the essence of sovereignty; the former encouraged direct and local democracy, which prevented the prompt expression of the sovereign will. By contrast, Schmitt found in Sieyes’ idea of constituent power a way to associate the extra-ordinary character of his account of sovereignty to the democratic principle of popular power. He thus presented constituent power as the meaning of sovereignty in democratic states. On his interpretation of Sieyes’ theory, constituent power belonged to the nation but, to be exercised, needed to be represented by a unitary figure, approved through plebiscites, and able to embody the unity of the nation acting as a unitary instance of decision: the sovereign dictator. The result is a complete reversal of Sieyes’ theory."
Impressive but arcane
Abstract and very academic, the selection of speakers is impressive but the sound quality of the recordings is often poor.
There’s a high pitch whining sound throughout the David D’Avray lecture. It was annoying throughout but afterwards my ears hurt and now I have a high pitched ringing in my ears that won’t go away. The hosts of this podcast should pull that episode and others like it to avoid causing HEARING LOSS. Really hope my hearing recovers. No podcast is worth this.
Very intellectually stimulating
Late to the party but this podcast is fantastic! I have never left a pod review but this is very thought provoking and the subjects keep my attention beyond listening. I find myself readin/researching more!