{"word_count": 2353, "character_count": 19904}
ArgumentThe distinction between state and society has influenced Western European thought since the 18th century, when it began to crystallize in the context of the rise of the modern nation-state. In the 18th and 19th centuries the state-society relationship was commonly articulated in terms of autonomy and emancipation, tending towards interpretations of the relationship as dichotomous or even antagonistic. This emphasis led to the eclipse of the concept from about the middle of the 19th century (being considered, against the background of the &#8220;social question&#8221; for instance, as no longer adequate to &#8220;think&#8221; the increasingly complex interpenetration of state and society), but perhaps also contributed to its rediscovery as of the 1980s, particularly in the context of struggles with totalitarian regimes. Although the dichotomous, even antagonistic understanding of the state-society relationship that was revived in view of these struggles led to renewed critique of the concept, this did not this time lead to its abandonment. Rather, an increasing body of academic literature internationally has explored, modified, and attempted to apply (usually in research on &#8220;civil society&#8221;) a notion that, however it is defined, is now widely agreed to be foundational to the democratic order (Keane 1988/2010). This new association in political theory of the state-society relationship with liberal democracy, with its role in balancing the claims of pluralism (e.g., freedom and autonomy in forming individual and group identities) and citizenship (e.g., the norms of &#8220;civility&#8221;), has undeniably normative implications (cf. Rosenblum/Post 2002; Chambers/Kopstein 2009). Nevertheless, that has not prevented the use of this concept as a theoretical or heuristic framework in academic research, not only in the political and social sciences but also as an &#8220;ideal-type&#8221; (highly debated and even contested) for the analysis and interpretation of historical developments, social structures and institutions (cf. Kocka 2000; Gosewinkel 2011).For those interested in a comparative perspective, understanding and applying this framework becomes only more complex as they struggle to orientate themselves within the academic discussion in other cultural/linguistic contexts. In other academic cultures the discussion may be confined to other disciplines (or seemingly absent altogether), or different categorizations and terminology may be used. Different problems and critiques may be formulated, or indeed similar ones using different language or different angles of approach. This is complicated by the fact that much of recent discourse on the concept has been mediated through the English concept of &#8220;civil society&#8221;. On the other hand, the conceptual history of the state-society relationship is marked by both convergences and divergences among &#8220;national&#8221; traditions in Western Europe.The goal of this workshop is to bring together doctoral students at any stage in their research project (those in early stages are expressly encouraged to participate) to explore the state-society distinction/relationship as a theoretical or heuristic framework for their research. The aim is to &#8220;pool resources&#8221; in order to aid reflection on this concept and its application in research across national/linguistic and disciplinary boundaries and to increase awareness of debates and problematizations (and resources) outside of participants&#8217; &#8220;home&#8221; culture. This will be done, not in abstract, but through participants&#8217; reflections on the state-society relationship in relation to their own concrete research projects. How can this notion provide a framework (or why is it not usable) for analysis and interpretation of their material? Which conceptual or practical problems are they facing in the operationalization of this concept?The workshop will be based on 20-min. papers or presentations followed by roundtable discussions. We will be accompanied in our explorations by Sylvie Le Grand Ticchi, lecturer (MCF-HDR) at the University of Paris Nanterre and a member of the Centre for German Studies and Research (CEREG) at the Sorbonne Nouvelle and Paris Nanterre. She has published diverse studies on state, society and religion in comparative perspective, e.g., in regard to constitutional issues (including a study of E.-W. B&#246;ckenf&#246;rde), education, and political resistance (in former East Germany). We hope to be joined in addition by one or two other experienced researchers.Proposals from all disciplines and fields of study are welcome; comparative perspectives are especially welcome but not a requirement. Research projects can include both historical and contemporary topics and need not be limited to Europe or defined by the nation-state.Submission guidelinesPlease send your proposal for a 20 min. paper or presentation as a PDF or Word document to Lise van der Eyk (inger-lise.vandereyk@etud.sorbonne-nouvelle.fr)by 4 Dec 2017The document should include the title of your presentation, an abstract of max. 300 words, and your full name and institutional affiliation.Proposals may be submitted in French or English. You will receive a response within approx. one week after the deadline to facilitate early booking of travel and accommodation. Funding is being sought in order to assist in covering traveling expenses for those unable to benefit from a reimbursement through their home institution, but cannot be guaranteed at this point.CoordinatorLise&#160;van&#160;der&#160;EykSelected SourcesThe sources listed below are a few relatively easily accessible entry points into the discussion in different academic contexts; they can be consulted for more extensive bibliographies or for examples of research applications. PLEASE NOTE: The choice of sources below should not be considered as limiting the scope of the discussion!!!Biziou, Micha&#235;l (2004). &#8220;De la soci&#233;t&#233; civile &#224; la soci&#233;t&#233; civile mondiale.&#8221; Cit&#233;s 2004/1 (no. 17): 13-23. DOI 10.3917/cite.017.0013.B&#246;ckenf&#246;rde, Ernst-Wolfgang (1992). &#8220;Die Bedeutung der Unterscheidung von Staat und Gesellschaft im demokratischen Sozialstaat der Gegenwart.&#8221; In Recht, Staat, Freiheit: Studien zur Rechtsphilosophie, Staatstheorie und Verfassungsgeschichte. 2nd ed., 209&#8211;43. Frankfurt a/M: Suhrkamp.Chambers, Simone and Jeffrey Kopstein (2009). &#8220;Civil Society and the State.&#8221; In Oxford Handbook of Political Theory. Edited by Anne Phillips, Bonnie Honig and John S. Dryzek, 363&#8211;81. Available online: http://individual.utoronto.ca/kopstein/publications/civil_society_and_the_state.pdf (accessed 14/10/2017).Colliot-Th&#233;l&#232;ne, Catherine (1996). &#8220;Etat et soci&#233;t&#233; civile.&#8221; In Dictionnaire de philosophie politique. Edited by Philippe Raynaud and St&#233;phane Rials, 225&#8211;30. Paris: PUF.DeLue, Steven M. (2015). &#8220;Civil Society.&#8221; In Encyclopedia of Political Thought, Vol. 2. Edited by Michael T. Gibbons et al., 531&#8211;42. Oxford: Wiley Blackwell.Ferry, Luc (1999). &#8220;L&#8217;&#233;mergence du couple Etat/soci&#233;t&#233;.&#8221; In Histoire de la philosophie politique. T&#244;me IV: Les critiques de la modernit&#233; politique. Edited by Alain Renaut,37&#8211;51. Paris: Calmann-L&#233;vy.Gosewinkel, Dieter (2011). &#8220;Civil Society.&#8221; In European History Online (EGO). Available online: http://www.ieg-ego.eu/gosewinkeld-2010-en (accessed 21/10/2017).Keane, John (2010). &#8220;Civil Society, Definitions and Approaches.&#8221; In International Encyclopedia of Civil Society. Edited by Helmut K. Anheier, Stefan Toepler and Regina List. Available online: http://www.johnkeane.net/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/jk_civil_sciety_definitions_encyclopedia.pdf (accessed 21/10/2017).Keane, John (1988). &#8220;Despotism and Democracy: The Origins and Development of the Distinction Between Civil Society and the State 1750-1850.&#8221; In Civil Society and the State: New European Perspectives. Edited by John Keane, 35&#8211;71. London, New York: Verso.Kocka, J&#252;rgen (2000). &#8220;Zivilgesellschaft als historisches Problem und Versprechen.&#8221; In Europ&#228;ische Zivilgesellschaft in Ost und West: Begriff, Geschichte, Chancen. Edited by Manfred Hildermeier, J&#252;rgen Kocka and Christoph Conrad, 13&#8211;40. Frankfurt/New York: Campus.Rangeon, Fran&#231;ois (1986). &#8220;Soci&#233;t&#233; civile : histoire d'un mot.&#8221; In La soci&#233;t&#233; civile. By Jacques Chevallier et al., 9&#8212;32. Paris: PUF. Available online: http://www.u-picardie.fr/curapp-revues/root/19/rangeon.pdf (accessed 21/10/2017).Rosenblum, Nancy L. and Robert C. Post, eds (2002). Civil Society and Government. Princeton: Princeton University Press. [collection of essays discussing the state-society relationship as viewed through the lens of different political theories: classical liberalism, liberal-egalitarianism, critical theory, feminism, natural law, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Islam, Confucian]ArgumentaireDepuis le XVIII&#232;me si&#232;cle, la pens&#233;e europ&#233;enne a &#233;t&#233; influenc&#233;e par la distinction entre Etat et soci&#233;t&#233;, distinction commen&#231;ant &#224; se cristalliser dans le contexte de la construction de l&#8217;Etat-nation moderne. Aux XVIII&#232;me et XIX&#232;me si&#232;cles, la relation Etat-soci&#233;t&#233; &#233;tait souvent pens&#233;e en termes d&#8217;autonomie et d&#8217;&#233;mancipation, tendant vers une analyse dichotomique, voire antagoniste des deux termes. La deuxi&#232;me partie du XIX&#232;me si&#232;cle observe m&#234;me sa quasi-disparition (parce que consid&#233;r&#233;e, au vu de la &#171;&#160;question sociale&#160;&#187;, par exemple, comme inad&#233;quate pour penser l&#8217;interp&#233;n&#233;tration de plus en plus complexe de l&#8217;Etat et de la soci&#233;t&#233;) alors que les ann&#233;es 1980 consacrent sa red&#233;couverte dans un contexte de lutte contre les r&#233;gimes totalitaires. Les critiques faites aux interpr&#233;tations dichotomiques, m&#234;me antagonistes, de la relation Etat-soci&#233;t&#233; ont &#233;t&#233; ressuscit&#233;es dans le contexte de ces luttes mais elles n&#8217;ont pas cette fois ci men&#233;es &#224; l&#8217;abandon du concept. C&#8217;est plut&#244;t un corpus croissant de litt&#233;rature acad&#233;mique internationale qui explore, modifie et tente d&#8217;appliquer (g&#233;n&#233;ralement via des recherches sur la &#171;&#160;soci&#233;t&#233; civile&#160;&#187;) un concept qui, quelle que soit sa d&#233;finition, est largement accept&#233; comme au fondement de l&#8217;ordre d&#233;mocratique (Keane 1988/2010). Cette nouvelle association dans la th&#233;orie politique de la relation Etat-soci&#233;t&#233; avec la d&#233;mocratie lib&#233;rale et son r&#244;le dans la recherche d&#8217;un &#233;quilibre entre les demandes de pluralisme (par ex. libert&#233; et autonomie dans la formation des identit&#233;s des individus ainsi que des groupes) et de citoyennet&#233; (par ex. les normes de &#171;&#160;civilit&#233;&#160;&#187;) a ind&#233;niablement des implications normatives (cf. Rosenblum/Post 2002&#160;; Chambers/Kopstein 2009). N&#233;anmoins, cela n&#8217;a pas emp&#234;ch&#233; l&#8217;utilisation de ce concept dans la recherche acad&#233;mique, non seulement dans les sciences politiques et sociales mais aussi comme &#171;&#160;id&#233;altype&#160;&#187; (fortement d&#233;battu et contest&#233;) pour l&#8217;analyse et l&#8217;interpr&#233;tation des d&#233;veloppements, structures sociales et institutions historiques (cf. Kocka 2000&#160;; Gosewinkel 2011).Pour les int&#233;ress&#233;s des perspectives comparatistes, la compr&#233;hension et l&#8217;application de cette notion devient encore plus complexe quand elles essayent de s&#8217;orienter dans les discussions acad&#233;miques aux contextes culturel et linguistique vari&#233;s. Dans d&#8217;autres cultures acad&#233;miques, la discussion peut &#234;tre confin&#233;e &#224; d&#8217;autres disciplines (voire semble absente), ou diff&#233;rentes cat&#233;gorisations et terminologies peuvent &#234;tre utilis&#233;es. Diff&#233;rents probl&#232;mes et critiques peuvent &#234;tre formul&#233;s, ou semblables, mais utilisant des langages ou approches diff&#233;rentes. Cela est complexifi&#233; par le fait qu&#8217;une grande partie du discours r&#233;cent sur le concept a &#233;t&#233; relay&#233; par le terme anglais de &#171;&#160;civil society&#160;&#187;, alors que l&#8217;histoire conceptuelle est marqu&#233;e aussi bien par les convergences que les divergences entre des traditions &#171;&#160;nationales&#160;&#187;.Le but de cet atelier est de r&#233;unir des doctorants &#224; n&#8217;importe quel stade de leur projet de recherche (est encourag&#233;e d&#8217;ailleurs la participation des doctorants en d&#233;but de recherche) afin d&#8217;explorer la relation Etat-soci&#233;t&#233; comme une approche th&#233;orique ou heuristique dans le cadre de leur recherche. L&#8217;objectif est d&#8217;unir les ressources afin d&#8216;aider &#224; une r&#233;flexion sur ce concept et son application dans la recherche au-del&#224; les limites nationales/linguistiques et disciplinaires afin d&#8217;accroitre la sensibilisation des d&#233;bats et les probl&#233;matisations (et ressources) en dehors de la culture acad&#233;mique de chaque participant. Cela sera fait, non par abstraction, mais &#224; travers les r&#233;flexions des participants sur la relation Etat-soci&#233;t&#233; par le prisme de leur propre projet de recherche. Comment ce concept peut-il fournir un cadre (ou pourquoi ne serait-il pas utilisable&#160;?) pour l&#8217;analyse et l&#8217;interpr&#233;tation de leur mati&#232;re&#160;? Quels probl&#232;mes conceptuels ou pratiques rencontrent-ils dans l&#8217;op&#233;rationnalisation de ce concept&#160;?L&#8217;atelier consistera en des pr&#233;sentations d&#8217;environ 20 min suivies de discussions en table ronde. Nous serons accompagn&#233;s dans nos r&#233;flexions par Sylvie Le Grand Ticchi, ma&#238;tre de conf&#233;rences HDR &#224; l&#8217;Universit&#233; Paris Nanterre et membre du Centre d'Etudes et de Recherches sur l'Espace Germanophone (CEREG) &#224; la Sorbonne Nouvelle (Paris 3) et Paris Nanterre. Germaniste et civilisationniste, elle a publi&#233; notamment sur &#201;tat, soci&#233;t&#233; et religion dans une perspective comparative, par exemple sur des questions constitutionnelles (y compris une &#233;tude sur E.-W. B&#246;ckenf&#246;rde), l&#8217;&#233;ducation, et les r&#233;sistances politiques (dans l&#8217;ex RDA). Nous esp&#233;rons profiter aussi de la participation d&#8217;un ou deux autres chercheur-e-s exp&#233;riment&#233;-e-s.Les propositions venant de toutes disciplines et domaines de recherche sont bienvenues&#160;; les perspectives comparatives sont surtout bienvenues mais ne sont pas obligatoires. Les projets de recherche peuvent avoir des sujets historiques comme contemporains et ne doivent pas forc&#233;ment &#234;tre limit&#233;s &#224; l&#8217;Europe ou par le cadre de l&#8217;Etat-nation.Soumission des propositions: Les propositions pour une communication de 20 min devront parvenir &#224; Lise van der Eyk (inger-lise.vandereyk@etud.sorbonne-nouvelle.fr)le 4 d&#233;cembre 2017 au plus tard&#160;;le document (au format PDF ou Word) doit inclure le titre de votre contribution, un&#160;r&#233;sum&#233; de max. 300 mots, et votre nom et affiliation. Les propositions peuvent &#234;tre r&#233;dig&#233;es&#160;en Fran&#231;ais ou en Anglais.Vous recevrez une r&#233;ponse environ une semaine apr&#232;s la date limite afin de pouvoir profiter des meilleurs tarifs de transport et h&#233;bergement. En fonction des financements obtenus, une participation aux frais de transport pourrait &#234;tre envisag&#233;e pour celles et ceux ne pouvant b&#233;n&#233;ficier d&#8217;un remboursement.CoordinatriceLise&#160;van&#160;der&#160;EykS&#233;lection de r&#233;f&#233;rences bibliographiquesLes sources cit&#233;es ci-dessous sont donn&#233;es seulement comme (quelques) pistes, relativement accessibles, &#160;&#224; la discussion dans des cultures acad&#233;miques diff&#233;rentes&#160;; elles peuvent aussi &#234;tre consult&#233;es pour des bibliographies plus larges comme pour des exemples de l&#8217;application dans la recherche. NB&#160;: Le choix des sources ici ne doit pas &#234;tre consid&#233;r&#233; comme limitant le champ de la discussion&#160;!!!Biziou, Micha&#235;l (2004). &#8220;De la soci&#233;t&#233; civile &#224; la soci&#233;t&#233; civile mondiale.&#8221;&#160;Cit&#233;s&#160;2004/1 (no. 17): 13-23. DOI 10.3917/cite.017.0013.B&#246;ckenf&#246;rde, Ernst-Wolfgang (1992). &#8220;Die Bedeutung der Unterscheidung von Staat und Gesellschaft im demokratischen Sozialstaat der Gegenwart.&#8221; In&#160;Recht, Staat, Freiheit: Studien zur Rechtsphilosophie, Staatstheorie und Verfassungsgeschichte. 2nd ed., 209&#8211;43. Frankfurt a/M: Suhrkamp.Chambers, Simone and Jeffrey Kopstein (2009). &#8220;Civil Society and the State.&#8221; In&#160;Oxford Handbook of Political Theory. Edited by Anne Phillips, Bonnie Honig and John S. Dryzek, 363&#8211;81. Available online:&#160;http://individual.utoronto.ca/kopstein/publications/civil_society_and_the_state.pdf&#160;(accessed 14/10/2017).Colliot-Th&#233;l&#232;ne, Catherine (1996). &#8220;Etat et soci&#233;t&#233; civile.&#8221; In&#160;Dictionnaire de philosophie politique. Edited by Philippe Raynaud and St&#233;phane Rials, 225&#8211;30. Paris: PUF.DeLue, Steven M. (2015). &#8220;Civil Society.&#8221; In&#160;Encyclopedia of Political Thought, Vol. 2. Edited by Michael T. Gibbons et al., 531&#8211;42. Oxford: Wiley Blackwell.Ferry, Luc (1999). &#8220;L&#8217;&#233;mergence du couple Etat/soci&#233;t&#233;.&#8221; In&#160;Histoire de la philosophie politique. T&#244;me IV: Les critiques de la modernit&#233; politique. Edited by Alain Renaut,37&#8211;51. Paris: Calmann-L&#233;vy.Gosewinkel, Dieter (2011). &#8220;Civil Society.&#8221; In&#160;European History Online (EGO). Available online:&#160;http://www.ieg-ego.eu/gosewinkeld-2010-en&#160;(accessed 21/10/2017).Keane, John (2010). &#8220;Civil Society, Definitions and Approaches.&#8221; In&#160;International Encyclopedia of Civil Society. Edited by Helmut K. Anheier, Stefan Toepler and Regina List. Available online:&#160;http://www.johnkeane.net/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/jk_civil_sciety_definitions_encyclopedia.pdf&#160;(accessed 21/10/2017).Keane, John (1988). &#8220;Despotism and Democracy: The Origins and Development of the Distinction Between Civil Society and the State 1750-1850.&#8221; In&#160;Civil Society and the State: New European Perspectives. Edited by John Keane, 35&#8211;71. London, New York: Verso.Kocka, J&#252;rgen (2000). &#8220;Zivilgesellschaft als historisches Problem und Versprechen.&#8221; In&#160;Europ&#228;ische Zivilgesellschaft in Ost und West: Begriff, Geschichte, Chancen. Edited by Manfred Hildermeier, J&#252;rgen Kocka and Christoph Conrad, 13&#8211;40. Frankfurt/New York: Campus.Rangeon, Fran&#231;ois (1986). &#8220;Soci&#233;t&#233; civile : histoire d'un mot.&#8221; In&#160;La soci&#233;t&#233; civile. By Jacques Chevallier et al., 9&#8212;32. Paris: PUF. Available online:&#160;http://www.u-picardie.fr/curapp-revues/root/19/rangeon.pdf&#160;(accessed 21/10/2017).Rosenblum, Nancy L. and Robert C. Post, eds (2002).&#160;Civil Society and Government. Princeton: Princeton University Press. [collection of essays discussing the state-society relationship as viewed through the lens of different political theories: classical liberalism, liberal-egalitarianism, critical theory, feminism, natural law, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Islam, Confucian]