Axel Honneth

[M]otives for social resistance and rebellion are formed in the context of moral experiences stemming from the violation of deeply rooted expectations regarding recognition. These expectations are internally linked to conditions for the formation of personal identity in that they indicate the societal patterns of recognition that allow subjects to know themselves to be both autonomous and individuated beings within their sociocultural environment. If these normative expectations are disappointed by society, this generates precisely the type of moral experience expressed in cases where subjects feel disrespected. Hurt feelings of this sort can, however, become the motivational basis for collective resistance only if subjects are able to articulate them within an intersubjective framework of interpretation that they can show to be typical for an entire group. (Struggle for Recognition, 163)

In other words, recognition, expressed through names and nicknames, are mechanisms through which individuals know themselves individually and also as parts of a group.

The type and nuance of a (nick)name evokes acceptance/cohesion (member) or isolation/exclusion (nonmember).

The tremors of this in our class resulted in different responses and attitudes within the group dynamic, creating the basis for a possible (if pressed) separation of the group into groups.

What does this show us with respect to monotheism?

[M]onotheism creates a new normative for authority by interrupting, or resisting, a preexisting normative and by creating boundaries between member and nonmember. It forms or produces identity through acts and attitudes of inclusion and exclusion.

The ideological power of monotheism is in its ability to "name": insider/outsider, good/bad, sacred/profane, heaven/hell, etc., and to convince people it has the power to regulate such categorical boundaries.

EX: Renaming "Muslim" as dangerous and retrograde:

The anxiety that lies at the heart of monotheism often manifests in dogged concerns over boundaries.

These concerns are often expressed through names and categories: foreign, profane, sinner, evil, infidel, min, disbeliever, etc.

Islamic State spokesman Abu Muhammad al-Adnani:

If you can kill a disbelieving American or European – especially the spiteful and filthy French – or an Australian, or a Canadian, or any other disbeliever from the disbelievers waging war, including the citizens of the countries that entered into a coalition against the Islamic State, then rely upon Allah, and kill him in any manner or way however it may be. Do not ask for anyone’s advice and do not seek anyone’s verdict. Kill the disbeliever, whether he is civilian or military, for they have the same ruling. Both of them are disbelievers.

^

|

This guy