Cornelius[i] Castoriadis was born on 11 March 1922 inConstantinople[111] (then part of theOttoman Empire), the son of fabric merchant Kaisar[112] and Sophia Kastoriadis,née Papachela (Παπαχελά).[5][113] His family had to move in July 1922[111] to Athens, the home of Castoriadis' mother, due to theGreco-Turkish War (1919–22).[112] Castoriadis developed an interest in politics after he came into contact withMarxist thought at the age of 13.[114] At the same time, he began studying traditional philosophy after purchasing a copy of the bookHistory of Philosophy (Ιστορία της Φιλοσοφίας,Istoria tis Filosofias, 2 vols., 1933) by thehistorian of ideasNikolaos Louvaris.[114]
Sometime between 1932 and 1935,Maximiani Portas (later known as "Savitri Devi") was Castoriadis' French tutor.[115] During the same period, he attended the 8thGymnasium of Athens inKato Patisia, from which he graduated in 1937 at age 15.[5][116]
In early 1944, he wrote his first essays on social science andMax Weber,[126] which he published in the journalArchive of Sociology and Ethics (Αρχείον Κοινωνιολογίας και Ηθικής,Archeion Koinoniologias kai Ithikis; published by the Greek Association for Sociological Studies – Εταιρεία Κοινωνιολογικών Σπουδών). The journal was initially headed by the sociologistAvrotelis Eleftheropoulos, but later by Castoriadis and his fellow law studentsDimitrios Tsakonas andMimika Kranaki.[127][128]
In his 1949 essay "The Relations of Production in Russia",[148] Castoriadis developed a critique of the supposedsocialist character of the government of theSoviet Union. According to Castoriadis, the central claim of theStalinist regime at the time was that themode of production in Russia was socialist, but the mode of distribution was not yet a socialist one since the socialist edification in the country had not yet been completed. However, according to Castoriadis' analysis, since the mode of distribution of the social product is inseparable from the mode of production,[149] the claim that one can have control over distribution while not having control over production is meaningless.[150]
Castoriadis was particularly influential in the turn of the intellectual left during the 1950s against the Soviet Union, because he argued that the Soviet Union was not acommunist but rather abureaucraticcapitalist state, which contrasted withWestern powers mostly by virtue of its centralized power apparatus.[151] His work in the OECD substantially helped his analyses. Castoriadis regarded theHungarian Revolution of 1956 as the first genuine uprising against bureaucratic regimes.[152][153]
His reflections on organization within a militant framework led him to confront the irreducible element of creation that cannot be described or anticipated in advance. The most explicit articulation of these ideas appears in his article "Proletarian Leadership" (1952),[66] where he argues that Marxist revolutionary practice is marked by a profound contradiction: on the one hand, it depends on a scientific understanding of social structures; on the other, its very possibility hinges on the inventive and transformative actions of countless individuals.[67]
To preventvisa complications,[154] his pre-1970 political writings were published under a pseudonym, as "Pierre Chaulieu" (earlyS. ou B. writings, 1949–1958) "Paul Cardan" (laterS. ou B. writings, 1959–1965) or "Jean-Marc Coudray" (Fayard, 1968).
Later, Castoriadis reissued most of hisSocialisme ou Barbarie texts in ten volumes through the10/18 publishing house between 1973 and 1979.[154]
In the latter years ofSocialisme ou Barbarie, Castoriadis came to reject theMarxist theories of economics and of history (Karl Marx'shistorical materialism),[155] especially in an essay on "Modern Capitalism and Revolution",[156] first published inSocialisme ou Barbarie in 1960–61 (first English translation in 1963 bySolidarity). Castoriadis' finalSocialisme ou Barbarie essay was "Marxism and Revolutionary Theory", published in April 1964 – June 1965.[m] There he concluded that arevolutionary Marxist must choose either to remain Marxist or to remain revolutionary.[157][17]
In 1968, Castoriadis married his second spouse,Piera Aulagnier,[159] a French psychoanalyst who had undergone psychoanalytic treatment under Lacan from 1955 until 1961.[160]
Castoriadis began to practice analysis in 1973 after he had undergone analysis in the 1960s, first with Irène Roubleff (EFP) and then later with Michel Renard (SFP).[161][163] In the early 1970s, he worked for a time with chronically psychotic patients at theMaison Blanche Psychiatric Hospital.[164]
His psychoanalytic thought was developed in a Lacanian milieu but adopted a critical stance from the outset.[165]
After the events ofMay 68, Castoriadis dedicated most of his time until 1971 to the study of thephilosophy of language, while from 1971 to 1975 he worked as editor of the philosophy journalTextures and, later, took over as editor of the political journalLibre (launched in 1977) until 1980.[168]
In his 1975 workL'Institution imaginaire de la société (Imaginary Institution of Society) and inLes carrefours du labyrinthe (Crossroads in the Labyrinth), published in 1978, Castoriadis began to develop his distinctive understanding of historical change as theemergence of irrecoverable otherness that must always be socially instituted and named in order to be recognized. Otherness emerges in part from the activity of the psyche itself. Creating external social institutions that give stable form to what Castoriadis terms the (ontological) "magma of social significations"[45][169][170] allows the psyche to create stable figures for the self, and to ignore the constant emergence of mentalindeterminacy andalterity.
For Castoriadis, self-examination could draw upon the resources of modernpsychoanalysis. Autonomous individuals—the essence of an autonomous society—must continuously examine themselves and engage in critical reflection. He writes:
... psychoanalysis can and should make a basic contribution to a politics of autonomy. For each person's self-understanding is a necessary condition for autonomy. One cannot have an autonomous society that would fail to turn back upon itself, that would not interrogate itself about its motives, its reasons for acting, its deep-seated [profondes] tendencies. Considered in concrete terms, however, society doesn't exist outside the individuals making it up. The self-reflective activity of an autonomous society depends essentially upon the self-reflective activity of the humans who form that society.[171]
Castoriadis was not calling for every individual to undergo psychoanalysisper se. Rather, by reforming education and political systems, individuals would be increasingly capable of critical self- and social reflection. He offers: "if psychoanalytic practice has a political meaning, it is solely to the extent that it tries, as far as it possibly can, to render the individual autonomous, that is to say, lucid concerning her desire and concerning reality, and responsible for her acts: holding herself accountable for what she does."[172]
In his 1980 "Facing the War" essay (later expanded into a 1981 book), he took the view that Russia had become the world's primary military power. To sustain this, in the context of the visible economic inferiority of the Soviet Union in the civilian sector, he proposed that the society may no longer be dominated by theone-party statebureaucracy but by a "stratocracy"[173]—a separate and dominant military sector with expansionist designs on the world.[174] He further argued that this meant there was no internal class dynamic that could lead to asocial revolution within Russian society and that change could only occur through foreign intervention.
He died on 26 December 1997 in Paris from complications followingheart surgery.[182] He was survived by Zoé Christofidi (his wife at the time of his death, whom he had married in 1978),[147] his daughter Sparta (born in 1947[9] from an earlier relationship between Castoriadis and Jeanine "Rilka" Walter,[183] also known as "Comrade Victorine" in theFourth International),[184] and Cybèle/Kyveli (born in 1980),[9] his younger daughter from his marriage to Zoé.[185]
Edgar Morin proposed that Castoriadis' work will be remembered for its remarkable continuity and coherence as well as for its extraordinary breadth which was "encyclopaedic" in the original Greek sense, for it offered apaideia, or education, that brought full circle the cycle of otherwise compartmentalized knowledge in the arts and sciences.[186] Castoriadis wrote essays on mathematics, physics, biology, anthropology, psychoanalysis, linguistics, society, economics, politics, philosophy, and art.
One of Castoriadis' many important contributions to social theory was the idea that social change involves radical discontinuities that cannot be understood in terms of any determinate causes or presented as a sequence of events. Change emerges throughthesocial imaginary without strict determinations,[26] but to be socially recognized, it must be instituted as arevolution. Any knowledge of society andsocial change can exist only by referring to (or by positing)social imaginarysignifications.[27] Thus, Castoriadis developed a conceptual framework where the sociological and philosophical category of the social imaginary has a central place and he offered an interpretation ofmodernity centered on the principal categories ofsocial institutions and social imaginary significations;[24] in his analysis, these categories are the product of the human faculties of theradicalimagination and the social imaginary, the latter faculty being the collective dimension of the former.[187] (According to Castoriadis, the sociological and philosophical category ofthe radicalimaginary[23] can be manifested only through the individual radical imagination and the social imaginary.)[25][188][189] However, the social imaginary cannot be reduced or attributed to subjective imagination, since the individual is informed through an internalization of social significations.[190][191]
He used traditional terms as much as possible, though consistently redefining them. Further, some of his terminology changed throughout the later part of his career, with the terms gaining greater consistency but breaking from their traditional meaning (thus creating neologisms). When reading Castoriadis, it is helpful to understand what he means by the terms he uses, since he does not redefine the terms in every piece where he employs them.
The concept ofautonomy was central to his early writings,[192] and he continued to elaborate on its meaning, applications, and limits until his death, gaining him the title of "philosopher of autonomy." The word itself isGreek, whereauto- means "for/by itself" andnomos means "law." It refers to the condition of "self-institution" by which one creates their own laws, whether as an individual or as a whole society. And while every society creates its own institutions, only the members ofautonomous societies are fully aware of the fact and consider themselves to be the ultimate source of justice.[193] In contrast, members of "heteronomous societies" (hetero-, "other") delegate this process to an authority outside of society, often attributing the source of their traditions to divine origins or, in modern times, to "historical necessity."[194] Castoriadis then identified the need of societies not only to create but to legitimize their laws, to explain, in other words, why their laws are just. Most traditional societies did that through religion, claiming their laws were given by God or a mythical ancestor and therefore must be true.
An exception to this rule is to be found inAncient Greece, where the constellation ofcity-states (poleis) that spread throughout the eastern Mediterranean, although not all democratic, showed strong signs of autonomy, and during its peak,classical Athens became fully aware of the fact as seen inPericles' Funeral Oration, wherePericles praises the Athenian way of life—valuing freedom over mere peace and quiet.[195] Castoriadis considered Ancient Greece, a topic that increasingly drew his attention, not as ablueprint to be copied but an experiment that couldinspire a truly autonomous community—one that could legitimize its laws without assigning their source to a higher authority. The Greeks differed from other societies because they not only started as autonomous but maintained this ideal by challenging their laws on a constant basis while obeying them to the same degree (even to the extent of enforcing capital punishment), proving that autonomous societies can indeed exist.
Regarding modern societies, Castoriadis notes that while religions have lost part of theirnormative function, their nature is still heteronomous, only that this time it has rational pretenses.Capitalism legitimizes itself through "reason", claiming that it makes "rational sense",[196] but Castoriadis observed that all such efforts are ultimatelytautological, in that they can only legitimize a system through the rules defined by the system itself. So just like theOld Testament claimed that "There is only one God, God", capitalism defines logic as the maximization of utility and minimization of costs, andthen legitimizes itself based on its effectiveness to meet these criteria. Surprisingly, this definition of logic is also shared byCommunism, which, despite the fact that it stands in seeming opposition, is the product of the same imaginary, and uses the same concepts and categories to describe the world, principally in material terms and through the process of human labor.
Castoriadis views the political organization of the Ancient Greek cities (poleis) not as a model to imitate, but rather as a source of inspiration towards an autonomous society. He also rejects the term "city-state" used to describe Ancient Greek cities; for him, the administration of Greekpoleis was not that of a State in the modern sense of the term, since Greekpoleis were self-administered. The same goes for colonization since the neighboringPhoenicians, who had a similar expansion in the Mediterranean, were monarchical till their end. During this time of colonization, however, around the time of Homer's epic poems, the Greeks, instead of transferring their mother city's social system to the newly established colony, for the first time in known history, legislated anew from the ground up. What also made the Greeks special was the fact that, following the above, they kept this system as a perpetual autonomy, which led to direct democracy.
He sees a tension in themodern West between, on the one hand, theproject of autonomy and the potential for creativity and, on the other hand, the spirit-crushing force of capitalism. These are respectively characterized as thecreative imaginary and thecapitalist imaginary:
I think that we are at a crossing in the roads of history, history in the grand sense. One road already appears clearly laid out, at least in its general orientation. That's the road of the loss of meaning, of the repetition of empty forms, of conformism, apathy, irresponsibility, and cynicism at the same time as it is that of the tightening grip of the capitalist imaginary of unlimited expansion of "rational mastery", pseudorational pseudomastery, of an unlimited expansion of consumption for the sake of consumption, that is to say, for nothing, and of a technoscience that has become autonomized along its path and that is evidently involved in the domination of this capitalist imaginary. The other road should be opened: it is not at all laid out. It can be opened only through a social and political awakening, a resurgence of theproject of individual and collective autonomy, that is to say, of the will to freedom. This would require an awakening of the imagination and of the creative imaginary.[78]
He argues that, in the last two centuries, ideas about autonomy again come to the fore: "This extraordinary profusion reaches a sort of pinnacle during the two centuries stretching between 1750 and 1950. This is a very specific period because of the very great density of cultural creation, but also because of its very strong subversiveness."[198][199]
In the context of being a specific term inpsychoanalysis, "imaginary" originates in the writings of the French psychoanalystJacques Lacan (as elaborated in his concept of "the Imaginary") and is strongly associated with Castoriadis' work. Castoriadis believed that for a given society, as people penetrate the layers of its culture deeper and deeper, they arrive atmeanings that do not mean something other than themselves. They are, so to speak, "final meanings" that the society in question has imposed on the world, on itself.[200] Because these meanings (manifestations of the "radical imaginary" in Castoriadian terminology) do not point to anything concrete, and because the logical categories needed to analyze them are derived from them, these meanings cannot be analysed rationally.[201] They are arational (rather thanirrational), and must therefore be acknowledged rather than comprehended in the common use of the term. Castoriadis' view on concept-formation is in sharp contrast to that ofpostmodernists likeJacques Derrida, who explicitly denies the existence of concepts "in and of themselves".[202]
The radical imaginary is at the basis of cultures and accounts for their differences. In his seminal workThe Imaginary Institution of Society (especially in Part II: "The Social Imaginary and the Institution"), Castoriadis argues that societies are foundednot as products of historical necessity, but as the result of a new and radical idea of the world, an idea that appears to spring fully formed and is practicallyirreducible. All cultural forms (laws and institutions, aesthetics and ritual) follow from this radical imaginary, and are not to be explained merely as products of material conditions. Castoriadis then is offering an "ontogenetic"[203] or "emergentist" model of history, one that is apparently unpopular amongst modern historians,[204] but can serve as a valuable critique ofhistorical materialism. For example, Castoriadis believed that Ancient Greeks had an imaginary by which the world stems fromChaos, while in contrast, theHebrews had an imaginary by which the world stems from the will of a rational entity, God orYahweh in theHebrew Bible. The former developed therefore a system ofdirect democracy where the laws were ever-changing according to the people's will while the second was a theocratic system according to which man is in an eternal quest to understand and enforce the will of God.[205]
Traditional societies had elaborate imaginaries, expressed through various creation myths, by which they explained how the world came to be and how it is sustained. Capitalism did away with this mythic imaginary by replacing it with what it claims to be pure reason. That same imaginary is the foundation of its opposing ideology,Communism. By that measure he observes (first in his main criticism ofMarxism, titled theImaginary Institution of Society,[68] and subsequently in a speech he gave at theUniversité catholique de Louvain on 27 February 1980)[206] that these two systems are more closely related than was previously thought, since they share the sameIndustrial Revolution type imaginary: that of a rational society where man's welfare is materially measurable and infinitely improvable through the expansion of industries and advancements in science. In this respect Marx failed to understand that technology is not, as he claimed, the main drive of social change, since there are historical examples where societies possessing near-identical technologies formed very different relations to them. An example given in the book is France and England during the Industrial Revolution, with the second being much more liberal than the first.[68] Similarly, in the issue ofecology, he observes that the problems facing the environment exist only within the capitalist imaginary that values the continuous expansion of industries. Trying to solve it by changing or managing these industries better might fail, since it essentially acknowledges this imaginary as real, thus perpetuating the problem.[174]
Castoriadis also believed that the complex historical processes through which new imaginaries are born are not directly quantifiable by science. This is because it is through the imaginaries themselves that the categories upon which science is applied are created. In the second part of hisImaginary Institution of Society (titled "The Social Imaginary and the Institution"), he gives the example ofset theory, which is at the basis offormal logic, which cannot function without having first defined the "elements" which are to be assigned to sets.[207] This initialschema of separation[49] (French:schéma de séparation) of the world into distinct elements and categories, therefore, precedes the application of (formal) logic and, consequently, science.
The concept ofChaos, as found in Ancient Greekcosmogony, plays a significant role in Castoriadis' work, and is connected to the idea of the "imaginary".[43][208] Castoriadis translates the Greek word "chaos" asnothingness. According to him, the core of the Greek imaginary was a world that came from Chaos rather than the will of God as described inGenesis. Castoriadis concludes that the Greek imaginary of a "world out of Chaos" was what allowed them to create institutions such as democracy, because—if the world is created out of nothing—man can model it as he sees fit,[209] without trying to conform to somedivine law. He contrasted the Greek imaginary to the Biblical imaginary (found in Genesis) in which God shapes the chaos that already exists.[210]
Castoriadis was asocial constructionist[211] and ameta-ethicalmoral relativist (but not acultural relativist) insofar as he held that the radical imaginary of each society was opaque to rational analysis. He believed that social norms and morals ultimately derive from a society's unique idea of the world, which emerges fully formed at a given moment in history and cannot be reduced further. From this, he concluded that any criteria by which one could evaluate these morals objectively arealso derived from the said imaginary, rendering this evaluation subjective. This does not mean that Castoriadis stopped believing in the value of social struggles for a better world; he simply thought that rationally proving their value is impossible.
This, however, does not mean that Castoriadis believed there is notruth, but that truth is linked to the imaginary which is ultimately arational. In his bookWorld in Fragments, which includes essays on science, he explicitly writes that "We have to understand thatthere is truth—and thatit is to be made/to be done, that to attain [atteindre] it people have to create it, which means, first and foremost, toimagine it".[212]
Castoriadis has influenced European (especiallycontinental)[10] thought in important ways. His interventions in sociological and political theory have resulted in some of the most well-known debates in political philosophy to emerge from the continent—particularly involving the figure ofcritical theoristJürgen Habermas (University of Frankfurt am Main, 1983–1994), especially in his 1985 workThe Philosophical Discourse of Modernity.[213][214] In 1988,neopragmatist philosopherRichard Rorty (University of Virginia, 1982–1998), citing Castoriadis, proposed that meaningful political and social change cannot emerge simply by extending past or present trends; instead, we must articulate visions of the future using concepts not inherited from the past.[215]
SociologistHans Joas (FAU, 1987–1990;JFKI atFU Berlin, 1993–1995) has published a number of articles in American journals in order to highlight the importance of Castoriadis' work to a North American sociological audience.[216]Social philosopherJóhann Páll Árnason (La Trobe University, 1975–2003) has been of enduring importance both for his critical engagement with Castoriadis' thought and for his sustained efforts to introduce it to the English-speaking public (especially during his editorship of the journalThesis Eleven).[217]
In the 21st century, there has been growing interest in Castoriadis' thought, including the publication of two monographs authored by Árnason's former students: Jeff Klooger's (Swinburne University of Technology)Castoriadis: Psyche, Society, Autonomy (2009) and Suzi Adams's (Flinders University)Castoriadis's Ontology: Being and Creation (2011).
Mai 68 : la brèche [May 68: The Breach],Fayard, 1968, under the pseudonym "Jean-Marc Coudray";[218] co-authored withEdgar Morin andClaude Lefort. (A book about the idea that theMay 68 uprising opened a breach in the established order. Castoriadis' ideas were a significant influence on participants in May 68—a fact acknowledged byDaniel Cohn-Bendit.[219][220])
La Société bureaucratique [Bureaucratic Society] in two volumes:Les Rapports de production en Russie andLa Révolution contre la bureaucratie, 1973.
L'Expérience du mouvement ouvrier [The Experience of the Labor Movement] in two volumes:Comment lutter andProlétariat et organisation, 1974.
L'Institution imaginaire de la société [The Imaginary Institution of Society],Seuil, 1975.
Les Carrefours du labyrinthe [Crossroads in the Labyrinth], Volume I, 1978.
Le Contenu du socialisme [On the Content of Socialism], 1979—originally published in three parts inS. ou B. (July 1955; translated inPSW 1, pp. 290–307),S. ou B. (July 1957; translated inPSW 2, pp. 90–154), andS. ou B. (January 1958; translated inPSW 2, pp. 155–192).
Capitalisme moderne et révolution [Modern Capitalism and Revolution] in two volumes, 1979.
Η Αρχαία Ελληνική Δημοκρατία και η Σημασία της για μας Σήμερα [Ancient Greek Democracy and Its Importance for Us Today], Athens: Ypsilon, 1999 (based on a lecture delivered inLeonidio on 17 August 1984).
Figures du pensable [Figures of the Thinkable] (Les carrefours du labyrinthe VI), 1999.
SurLe Politique de Platon [Commentary onThe Statesman of Plato], 1999.
Sujet et vérité dans le monde social-historique. La création humaine 1 [Subject and Truth in the Social-Historical World. Human Creation 1], 2002.
Ce qui fait la Grèce, 1. D'Homère à Héraclite. La création humaine 2 [What Makes Greece, 1. From Homer to Heraclitus. Human Creation 2], 2004.
Φιλοσοφία και επιστήμη. Ένας διάλογος με τον Γεώργιο Λ. Ευαγγελόπουλο [Philosophy and Science. A Discussion with Yorgos L. Evangelopoulos], Athens: Eurasia books, 2004,ISBN960-8187-09-5.
Une Société à la dérive, entretiens et débats 1974–1997 [A Society Adrift], 2005.
Post-scriptum sur l'insignifiance : entretiens avecDaniel Mermet; suivi de dialogue [Postscript on Insignificance], 2007.
Fenêtre sur le chaos [Window on the Chaos] (compiled by Enrique Escobar, Myrto Gondicas, and Pascal Vernay), Seuil, 2007,ISBN978-2-02-090826-9. (Castoriadis' writings on modern art andaesthetics.)
Ce qui fait la Grèce, 2. La cité et les lois. La création humaine 3 [What Makes Greece, 2. The City and Laws. Human Creation 3], 2008.
L'Imaginaire comme tel [The Imaginary as Such], 2008.
Histoire et création : Textes philosophiques inédits, 1945–1967 [History and Creation: Unedited Philosophical Texts 1945–1967], 2009.
Ce qui fait la Grèce, 3. Thucydide, la force et le droit. La création humaine 4 [What Makes Greece, 3. Thucydides, Force and Right. Human Creation 4], 2011.
La Culture de l'égoïsme [The Culture of Egoism] (transcription of an interview that Castoriadis andChristopher Lasch gave toMichael Ignatieff in 1986; translated into French by Myrto Gondicas),Climats, 2012,ISBN978-2-08-128463-0 (interview about the topic of the retreat of individuals from public space intoprivate matters).
Dialogue sur l'histoire et l'imaginaire social [Dialogue on History and the Social Imaginary], 2016 (transcription of an interview that Castoriadis gave toPaul Ricœur).
Collected political writings (6 vols.)
Écrits politiques 1945–1997 [Political Writings 1945–1997] (compiled by Myrto Gondicas, Enrique Escobar and Pascal Vernay), Éditions du Sandre:
La Question du mouvement ouvrier [The Question of Workers' Movement] (vols. 1 and 2), 2012.
Quelle démocratie ? [What Democracy?] (vols. 3 and 4), 2013.
La Société bureaucratique [The Bureaucratic Society] (vol. 5), 2015.
Guerre et théories de la guerre [War and Theories of War] (vol. 6), 2016.
Écologie et politique, suivi de correspondances et compléments [Ecology and Politics – Followed by Correspondence and Additions] (vol. 7), 2020.
Sur la dynamique du capitalisme et autres textes, suivi de l'impérialisme et la guerre [On the Dynamics of Capitalism and Other Texts – Followed by Imperialism and War] (vol. 8), 2020.
Selected translations of works by Castoriadis
The Imaginary Institution of Society [IIS] (trans. Kathleen Blamey). MIT Press, Cambridge, MA 1998 [1987]. 432 pp. ISBN0-262-53155-0.
The Castoriadis Reader [CR] (ed./trans. David Ames Curtis). Blackwell Publisher, Oxford 1997. 470 pp. ISBN1-55786-704-6.
World in Fragments: Writings on Politics, Society, Psychoanalysis, and the Imagination [WIF] (ed./trans. David Ames Curtis). Stanford University Press, Stanford, CA 1997. 507 pp. ISBN0-8047-2763-5.
Political and Social Writings [PSW 1]. Volume 1:1946–1955. From the Critique of Bureaucracy to the Positive Content of Socialism (ed./trans. David Ames Curtis). University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis 1988. 348 pp. ISBN0-8166-1617-5.
Political and Social Writings [PSW 2]. Volume 2:1955–1960. From the Workers' Struggle Against Bureaucracy to Revolution in the Age of Modern Capitalism (ed./trans. David Ames Curtis). University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis 1988. 363 pp. ISBN0-8166-1619-1.
Political and Social Writings [PSW 3]. Volume 3:1961–1979. Recommencing the Revolution: From Socialism to the Autonomous Society (ed./trans. David Ames Curtis). University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis 1992. 405 pp. ISBN0-8166-2168-3.
Modern Capitalism and Revolution [MCR] (trans.Maurice Brinton), London:Solidarity, 1965 (including an introduction and additional English material by Brinton; the second English edition was published by Solidarity in 1974, with a new introduction by Castoriadis).
Philosophy, Politics, Autonomy. Essays in Political Philosophy [PPA] (ed. David Ames Curtis). Oxford University Press, New York/Oxford 1991. 306 pp. ISBN0-19-506963-3.
Crossroads in the Labyrinth [CL] (trans. M. H. Ryle/K. Soper). MIT Press, Cambridge, MA 1984. 345 pp.
On Plato's Statesman [OPS] (trans. David Ames Curtis). Stanford University Press, Stanford, CA 2002. 227 pp.
"Psychoanalysis and Politics", in:Sonu Shamdasani and Michael Münchow (eds.),Speculations After Freud: Psychoanalysis, Philosophy, and Culture, Routledge, 1994, pp. 1–12 (also in:World in Fragments, 1997, pp. 125–136).
Democracy and Relativism: A Debate [DR]. Translated from the French by John V. Garner. Rowman & Littlefield, 2019.ISBN978-1786610959. (Also anon. trans.January 2013.)
^KDKE was previously known as "Occupation-era KDKE" (1942), "DKKE" (1943), and "DEKE" (1944). It was renamed "KDKE" in 1946[105] and dissolved in 1967.
^Andreas Papandreou was accused of printing the newspaperProletarios (Προλετάριος) for theTrotskyist groupEOKDE, while Castoriadis was accused of being a recipient of the newspaper.[5]
^Their informal group was called Idealistic Philosophical Group (Ιδεοκρατική Φιλοσοφική Ομάδα).Odysseas Elytis andAndreas Papandreou were also members of the same group during their university years.[123]
^The essay "Marxism and Revolutionary Theory" was republished in 1975 as Part I of his bookThe Imaginary Institution of Society (the second part being "The Social Imaginary and the Institution", a previously unpublished follow-up to "Marxism and Revolutionary Theory").
^It was called the Fourth Group because it was the fourth major psychoanalytic group to emerge in France, followingSPP (founded 1926),EFP (1964–1980; originally known asSFP, 1953–1963), andAPF (founded 1964).
^abBenoît Challand, "Socialisme ou Barbarie or the Partial Encounters Between Anarchism and Critical Marxism", in: Alex Prichard, Ruth Kinna, Dave Berry, Saku Pinta (eds.),Libertarian Socialism: Politics in Black and Red, Palgrave Macmillan, 2012, pp. 210–231, esp. 210, "... Castoriadis's evident legacy to Left-libertarian thinking and his radical break with orthodox Marxist-Leninism ..."
^Claude Lefort,Writing: The Political Test, Duke University Press, 2000, Translator's Foreword by David Ames Curtis, p. xxiv, "Castoriadis, the historianPierre Vidal-Naquet, nowLefort ... are themselves quite articulate in their own right and historically associated with a libertarian socialist outlook..."
^Ojeili, Chamsy (2001). "Post-Marxism with Substance: Castoriadis and the Autonomy Project".New Political Science.23 (2):225–239.doi:10.1080/07393140120054047.ISSN0739-3148.Receiving his political inheritance from the broad libertarian socialist tradition, Castoriadis continues to challenge the domination of state and capital and to insist on the liberatory possibilities of direct democracy.
^abArthur Hirsh,The French Left, Black Rose Books, 1982, p. 126.
^Suzi Adams (ed.).Cornelius Castoriadis: Key Concepts. London and New York: Bloomsbury Academic, 2014, "Democracy" entry by Ingerid S. Straume: "[Castoriadis'] thought certainly reflects ideas of radical, participatory and direct democracy, communitarianism and republicanism ...".ISBN978-1-4411-7290-7.
^Sean McMorrow,The Power to Assume Form: Cornelius Castoriadis and Regimes of Historicity, Rowman & Littlefield, 2023, p. 29.
^abIIS, p. 160: "We do not need, therefore, to 'explain' how and why the imaginary, the imaginary social significations and the institutions that incarnate them, become autonomous."
^IIS, p. 282; confer Freud's term(Vorstellungs-) Repräsentanz des Triebes – "ideational representative of the drive" (Sigmund Freud, "Die Verdrängung" ("Repression"), in:Internationale Zeitschrift für ärztliche Psychoanalyse, Vol. III, Cahier 3, 1915,p. 130).
^Yannis Stavrakakis. "Creativity and its Limits: Encounters with Social Constructionism and the Political in Castoriadis and Lacan."Constellations,9(4):522–539 (2002).
^Les carrefours du labyrinthe: Le monde morcelé (1990), p. 218.
^ab"A magma is that from which one can extract (or in which one can construct) an indefinite number ofensemblist organizations but which can never be reconstituted (ideally) by a (finite or infinite) ensemblist composition of these organizations." (IIS, p. 343.)
^This is Castoriadis' version (IIS, p. 104) of Freud's mottoWo Es war, soll Ich werden ("Where Id was, Ego shall come to be"; see Sigmund Freud,Neue Folge der Vorlesungen zur Einführung in die Psychoanalyse (New Introductory Lectures On Psycho-Analysis): 31.Vorlesung).
^Philosophical elucidation (as opposed to "scientific explanation" and "sociological understanding") is a methodology pertaining to philosophical-historical research (research on the social-historical conditions of possibility) which is "inseparable from a political aim and a political project" (IIS, pp. 2–3).
^"The institution presupposes the institution: it can exist only if individuals fabricated by the institution make the institution exist" (WIF, p. 315). Klooger has compared Castoriadis' idea of the 'circle of creation' withHeidegger's idea of the 'hermeneutic circle' (Klooger 2009, p. 254).Stathis Gourgouris (2003, p. 153) pointed out that the circle of creation is "a circle whose Being is nowhere, since in itself it accounts for the meaning of Being, a meaning that is always inevitably a human ... affair", and that, contrary to what Heidegger advocates, the circle of creation "is never broken by revelation (by 'unconcealment'—aletheia)".
^The paradox arising from the assertion that historical consciousness universalizes historical knowledge; seeIIS, pp. 34–5; Klooger 2009, p. 242; Konstantinos Kavoulakos,"Cornelius Castoriadis on Social Imaginary and Truth",Ariadne 12 (2006), pp. 201–213.
^Castoriadis posits that newforms are radically novel; this, however, does not imply neither that ontological creation has no prior foundation—it is notin nihilo—nor that it has no constraints—it is notcum nihilo. Confer:FT B, pp. 241, 258.
^"Being is creation,vis formandi [formative force]: not the creation of 'matter-energy,' but the creation offorms" (Fait et à faire, p. 212).
^"For what is given in and through history is not the determined sequence of the determined but the emergence of radical otherness, immanent creation, non-trivial novelty." (IIS, p. 184.)
^"[T]ime is essentially linked to the emergence of alterity. Time is this emergence as such—whereas space is "only" its necessary concomitant. Time is creation and destruction—that means, time is being in its substantive determinations." (WIF, p. 399.)
^abCornelius Castoriadis, "From Marx to Aristotle, from Aristotle to Us" (trans.Andrew Arato),Social Research45(4):667–738, 1978, esp. p. 738: "It is a question of the destruction of economic motivations, by destroying the "socially objective" conditions of its [sic] possibility: the differentiation of revenues."
^PSW 2, p. 152: "As for theadministration of justice [in asocialist economy], it will be in the hands ofrank-and-file bodies."
^"Capitalism can function only by continually drawing upon the genuinelyhuman activity of those subject to it, while at the same time trying to level and dehumanize them as much as possible." (IIS, p. 16.)
^Suzi Adams, Jeremy Smith (eds.),Social Imaginaries,1(1), Spring 2015, p. 38: "Ecological autonomy in [Castoriadis'] assessment is 'the question of theself-limitation of society'..."
^Adams, S. and Árnason, J. P. (2024)."Done and yet to be done: The legacy of Castoriadis".International Journal of Social Imaginaries,3(2), October 2024 ("Special Issue: Polis, Autonomy, Meaning: Castoriadis in Debate"), pp. 137–151.
^CL, pp. 46–115: "Psychoanalysis: Project and Elucidation"; Elliott 2003, p. 92.
^Cornelius Castoriadis, "The State of the Subject Today",American Imago, Winter 1989,46(4), pp. 371–412 (also in:WIF, pp. 137–171). Cf. V. Karalis (2005). "Castoriadis, Cornelius (1922–97)", in: John Protevi (ed.),The Edinburgh Dictionary of Continental Philosophy, Edinburgh University Press, 2005, pp. 86–7.
^Christos Memos. "Castoriadis and Social Theory: From Marginalization to Canonization to Re-radicalization". In: Alex Law and Eric Royal Lybeck (eds.).Sociological Amnesia: Cross-currents in Disciplinary History. Palgrave Macmillan, 2015. p. 190.
^Pierre Chaulieu [Cornelius Castoriadis], "Les rapports de production en Russie",Socialisme ou Barbarie no. 2 (May–June 1949), reprinted inLa Société bureaucratique: Volume 1, Christian Bourgois Éditeur, 1990 and inPSW 1, pp. 135–158.
^"[L]e mode de répartition du produit social est inséparable du mode de production." (Cornelius Castoriadis,La Société bureaucratique: Volume 1, Christian Bourgois Éditeur, 1990, p. 164.)
^"L'Idée que l'on puisse dominer la répartition sans dominer la production est de l'enfantillage." (La Société bureaucratique: Volume 1, Christian Bourgois Éditeur, 1990, p. 166.)
^The relevant quote fromIIS, p. 14 is: "Starting from revolutionary Marxism, we have arrived at the point where we have to choose between remaining Marxist and remaining revolutionaries".
^Klooger, Jeff. "The Guise of Nothing: Castoriadis on Indeterminacy, and its Misrecognition in Heidegger and Sartre",Critical Horizons,14(1), 2013, p. 7: "'Magma' is the name Castoriadis gives to the mode of being which he sees as underlying all others, and which is characterized by an indeterminacy in which particular determinations come to be, but without congealing into inalterable forms, and without diminishing the potential for the emergence of new and different determinations."
^Subsequent attempts by Castoriadis at formalizing the notion of magma were not successful. According to logician Athanassios Tzouvaras, the properties of a magma that Castoriadis proposed were either unformalizable or inconsistent – Athanassios Tzouvaras,"Sets with dependent elements: Elaborating on Castoriadis' notion of magma",Studia Logica,112(4):735–760. 2024.
^FT A: "Imaginary and Imagination at the Crossroads" (essay based on a speech given inAbrantes in November 1996), p. 151. The quote appears in a slightly different translation inFT B (Figures of the Thinkable, trans. by Helen Arnold, Stanford University Press, 2007), pp. 89–90.
^FT A: "First Institution of Society and Second-Order Institutions" (essay based on a lecture presented on 15 December 1985 in Paris), p. 163.
^Sophie Klimis andLaurent Van Eynde (eds.),L'imaginaire selon Castoriadis: thèmes et enjeux, Facultés Universitaires Saint Louis à Bruxelles, 2006, p. 47 n. 8.
^He had proposed in his application form the creation of a Chair inRecherches sur les régimes sociaux contemporains, "Research on contemporary social systems" (Dosse 2014, p. 308), which he eventually occupied.
^"Alienation appears first of all as the alienation of a society to its institutions, as theautonomization of institutions in relation to society." (IIS, p. 115.)
^Cornelius Castoriadis.Ce qui fait la Grèce : Tome 3, Thucydide, la force et le droit. Seuil 2011. (Séminaire of 13 February 1985.)
^Cornelius Castoriadis (1999). "La « rationalité » du capitalisme" ["The 'Rationality' of Capitalism"] inFigures du Pensable, Paris: Seuil, 1999.
^Castoriadis advocated that "[t]he surging forth [surgissement] of signification—of the institution, of society—is creation and self-creation. ... Signification emerges to cover over the Chaos, thus bringing into being a mode of being that posits itself as negation of the Chaos" (WIF, p. 315).
^Hans Joas. March 1989. "Institutionalization as a Creative Process: The Sociological Importance of Cornelius Castoriadis's Political Philosophy",American Journal of Sociology,4(5), 1184–99.
Marios Emmanouilidis.Heretical Paths: Greek Trotskyism and the Second World War [Αιρετικές διαδρομές. Ο ελληνικός τροτσκισμός και ο Β' παγκόσμιος πόλεμος]. Filistor, 2002.
Alan D. Schrift.Twentieth-Century French Philosophy: Key Themes and Thinkers. John Wiley & Sons, 2006.ISBN978-1-4051-4394-3.
Theofanis Tasis.Castoriadis – A philosophy of autonomy [Καστοριάδης – Μια φιλοσοφία της αυτονομίας]. Athens: Eurasia books. 2007.ISBN978-960-8187-22-1.
Alexandros Schismenos.The Human Tempest – Psyche and Αutonomy in the Philosophy of Cornelius Castoriadis [Η Ανθρώπινη Τρικυμία – Ψυχή και Αυτονομία στη Φιλοσοφία του Κορνήλιου Καστοριάδη]. Athens: Exarcheia. 2013.ISBN978-618-80336-5-8.
Sotiris Amarantos.Κορνήλιος Καστοριάδης – Χάνα Άρεντ: Η έννοια του πολιτικού [Cornelius Castoriadis – Hannah Arendt: The Concept of the Political]. Piotita, 2019.ISBN978-960-78-0386-3.
Suzi Adams (ed.).Ricoeur and Castoriadis in Discussion: On Human Creation, Historical Novelty, and the Social Imaginary. Rowman & Littlefield, 2017 [based on a radio discussion between Ricoeur and Castoriadis from 1985].ISBN978-178-66-0136-0.
Giorgio Baruchello and Ingerid S. Straume (eds.).Creation, Rationality and Autonomy: Essays on Cornelius Castoriadis. Aarhus Universitetsforlag, 2013.ISBN978-878-75-6499-1.
Peter Dews. "Imagination and the Symbolic: Castoriadis and Lacan."Constellations,9(4), December 2002.
Dimitris Eleas.Ιδιωτικός Κορνήλιος: Προσωπική Μαρτυρία για τον Καστοριάδη [Private Cornelius: Personal Testimony about Castoriadis]. Athens: Angelakis, 2014.ISBN978-618-5011-69-7.
Andrea Gabler.Antizipierte Autonomie. Zur Theorie und Praxis der Gruppe "Socialisme ou Barbarie" (1949–1967). Hanover: Offizin Verlag, 2009.ISBN978-3-930345-64-9.
Yannis Ktenas and Alexandros Schismenos (eds.)Η Σκέψη του Κορνήλιου Καστοριάδη και η Σημασία της για μας Σήμερα [The Thought of Cornelius Castoriadis and its Significance for Us Today]. Athens: Eurasia books, 2018.ISBN978-618-5027-89-6.
Johann Michel.Ricoeur and the Post-Structuralists: Bourdieu, Derrida, Deleuze, Foucault, Castoriadis. Rowman & Littlefield International, 2014.ISBN978-1-78348-094-4.
Angelos Mouzakitis.Meaning, Historicity, and the Social: A Critical Approach to the Works of Heidegger, Gadamer, and Castoriadis. VDM Verlag Dr. Müller, 2008.ISBN978-3-63903-851-4.
Anastasia Oikonomou.The Influences of Aristotle's Philosophy on the Work of Cornelius Castoriadis [Οι επιδράσεις της φιλοσοφίας του Αριστοτέλους στο έργο του Κορνήλιου Καστοριάδη. Zitros, 2022.ISBN978-960-6490-97-2
Yorgos Oikonomou (ed.),Η Γένεση της Δημοκρατίας και η Σημερινή Κρίση [The Birth of Democracy and Contemporary Crisis]. Athens: Eurasia books, 2011.ISBN978-960-8187-77-1.
Janet Sarbanes.Letters on the Autonomy Project. Punctum Books, 2022.
Alexandros Schismenos and Nikos Ioannou.Μετά τον Καστοριάδη. Δρόμοι της Αυτονομίας στον 21ο Αιώνα [After Castoriadis. Roads to Autonomy in the 21st Century]. Athens: Exarcheia, 2014.ISBN978-618-5128-03-6.
Brian C. J. Singer, "The Early Castoriadis: Socialism, Barbarism and the Bureaucratic Thread",Canadian Journal of Political and Social Theory / Revue canadienne de théorie politique et sociale,3(3): 67–87, Fall 1979.
Society of Friends of Cornelius Castoriadis.Ψυχή, Λόγος, Πόλις [Psyche, Logos, Polis]. Athens: Ypsilon, 2007.ISBN978-960-17-0219-3.
David Ames Curtis,"Cornelius Castoriadis: An Obituary",Salmagundi, No. 118/119:52–61, Spring–Summer 1998. Reprinted as: "Cornelius Castoriadis: Philosopher of the Social Imagination".Free Associations,7(3):321–30, 1999.
The Cornelius Castoriadis/Agora International (CC/AI) Website containsbibliographies andvideographers in many languages, a Castoriadis interview, a "Teaching Castoriadis" section, videos from the 1990 Castoriadis Colloquium atCerisy (France), and the complete text of theSocialisme ou Barbarie magazine series (texts scanned in the original French), as well as "News" items of current and past interest. Agora International (AI) was founded in 1990 to enable free access to Castoriadis' ideas.
_(%25C2%25A9Kefaire).jpg)
Media related toCornelius Castoriadis at Wikimedia Commons
Quotations related toCornelius Castoriadis at Wikiquote
Cornelius Castoriadis at Wikibooks
The dictionary definition ofanerithmon gelasma at Wiktionary
