Ontology and Politics: Interdependence and Radical Contingency in Merleau-Ponty's Political Interworld.

Summary

Starting from Merleau-Ponty's call to begin again in both philosophy and politics, this paper examines how his later ontological ideas—radical interdependence (the reversibility thesis and 'flesh') and radical contingency—carry political implications for humanism, democracy, and progress. The author argues that recognizing ontological interdependence and contingency can support a flourishing democracy, and that ontology is inherently political: getting ontology right is a matter of discovery, not choice. The paper traces Merleau-Ponty's shift from early political engagements with Nazism, Marxism, and humanism toward later ontological concerns, noting his distancing from Marxism after revelations of Stalin's gulags and the Korean War, while maintaining no rupture in his philosophical vision.

Study at a glance

Abstract

This paper takes as its point of departure Merleau-Ponty's assertion: "everything will have to begin again, in politics as well as in philosophy". In pursuing his later work, Merleau-Ponty signalled the need for a reconfiguration of his philosophical vision, so it was no longer caught in Cartesianism and the philosophy of consciousness. This required a turn towards ontology through which he consolidated two key ideas: firstly, a pervasive interdependence articulated in his reversibility thesis and the ontology of 'flesh'; secondly, a radical contingency at the heart of existence. This paper interrogates the political implications of these ideas, and specifically regarding humanism and human progress. Relatedly, I address the question - how might recognitions of ontological interdependence and radical contingency support a flourishing democracy? Merleau-Ponty's early political work concerned the issues of his day - Nazism, Marxism and the status of humanism - and did not engage extensively with these emerging onto-political concerns. Nonetheless, there are indicative reflections in the writings and interviews; the political implications of his ontological interrogations become more thematic in the later works. There is no rupture between the earlier and later works regarding his philosophical vision, although he later distanced himself from Marxism with revelations of the gulags under Stalin and the Korean War. The overarching claim of this paper - we need to rethink politics from the ground up beginning with ontology; ontology is political and the political is intrinsically ontologically informed. Getting the ontology 'right' is a matter of discovery and not theory choice.