The DOI matches its Crossref record.
The New Constellation: The Ethical-Political Horizons of Modernity/Postmodernity.
Abstract
During the last two decades Richard Bernstein has established a worldwide reputation as one of the few philosophers able to bridge different traditions of thought and to clarify, through sympathetic criticism, the key intellectual issues of our time. In these 10 essays he explores the ethical and political dimensions of the modernity/postmodernity debates.Bernstein argues that modernity/postmodernity should be understood as a pervasive mood - what Heidegger calls a Stimmung - one that is amorphous, shifting, and protean but that nevetheless exerts a powerful influence on our current ways of thinking and acting. Focusing on such thinkers as Heidegger, Derrida, Foucault, Rorty, and Habermas, Bernstein seeks to demonstrate the strengths and weaknesses of their work and to highlight the ways in which they have contributed to the formation of a new and distinctive constellation of ideas and themes.Richard J. Bernstein is Vera List Professor of Philosophy at the New School for Social Research.The Essays: Philosophy, History, and Critique. The Rage Against Reason. Incommensurability and Otherness Revisited. Heidegger's Silence? Ethos and Technology. Foucault: Critique as a Philosophic Ethos. Serious Play: The Ethical-Political Horizon of Derrida. An Allegory of Modernity/Postmodernity: Habermas and Derrida. One Step Forward, Two Steps Backward: Rorty on Liberal Democracy. Rorty's Liberal Utopia, Reconciliation/Rupture.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Understanding and Validity in Qualitative Research
Maxwell, J. (1992) · Harvard Educational Review · doi:10.17763/haer.62.3.8323320856251826 · Cited by 2,951
Evaluation, Policy Learning and Evidence‐Based Policy Making
Sanderson, I. (2002) · Public Administration · doi:10.1111/1467-9299.00292 · Cited by 1,068
Judging the quality of qualitative inquiry: Criteriology and relativism in action
Sparkes, A. C., & Smith, B. (2009) · Psychology of Sport and Exercise · doi:10.1016/j.psychsport.2009.02.006 · Cited by 596
Self, Society, and the "New Gerontology"
Holstein, M. B., & Minkler, M. (2003) · The Gerontologist · doi:10.1093/geront/43.6.787 · Cited by 503
Policy analysis, science and politics: from 'speaking truth to power' to 'making sense together'
Hoppe, R. (1999) · Science and Public Policy · doi:10.3152/147154399781782482 · Cited by 346
Metadata
- Authors
- McCarthy, T., & Bernstein, R. J.
- Venue
- Philosophy and Phenomenological Research
- Publisher
- JSTOR
- Published
- 1995-12
- Volume
- 55
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 977
- ISSN
- 0031-8205 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1576220516
- Cited by
- 675
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 165.09
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The New Constellation: The Ethical-Political Horizons of Modernity/Postmodernity. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2307/2108349
- The paper
- McCarthy, T., & Bernstein, R. J. (1995). The New Constellation: The Ethical-Political Horizons of Modernity/Postmodernity. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research. https://doi.org/10.2307/2108349
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.