Main content start
Passing By: On Talkativeness, Silence, and New-Values Creation
Speaker
Shalini Satkunanandan, Associate Professor of Political Science, University of California, Davis
Date
Fri April 17th 2026, 11:30am - 1:00pm
Location
Graham Stuart Lounge - Encina Hall West, Room 400
Abstract
This paper is a chapter of a book-length manuscript, titled Passing By. There I question whether currently preferred tactics of direct contestation, such as dialogue and protest, are apt for the specific task of transforming shared values—the visions of flourishing immanent in our practices and which give our lives meaning. Many theorists regard a change in values as a necessary condition for significant change in shared life, including but not limited to enduring political transformations. I show how tactics of direct contestation can encourage reactive value-change and explore a quieter, more oblique practice by which individuals and collectives might instantiate new values in a less reactive fashion. To “pass by” is to decline direct contest. It is to come close to and then veer away from the most insistent embodiments of reigning values, which are usually found in and around the state, in the larger cultural public sphere, and in other mainstream milieux. Passing by is neither engagement nor disengagement—a common binary for classifying tactics for change—or their combination. It is a skirting, an integrated spatial maneuver of coming close to, even briefly intervening within, and then veering away from spaces with clamorous expressions of ascendant values. Repetition enables its value-creative potency, which involves recovering passions effaced by reigning values and, through new passional perspectives, birthing new language and practices for new values. Passing by may look like acquiescence or resignation to the status quo, but it is not.I take the bare practice and idiom of passing by from Thus Spoke Zarathustra, where Nietzsche’s fictional prophet strives to create new values to replace world-devaluing Christian morality. Rather than focus, like most scholars, on Zarathustra’s doctrines, I highlight his spatial movements. There is a specific and instructive episode in Thus Spoke Zarathustra titled “On Passing By,” but I argue that when read as a travelogue Nietzsche’s entire text emerges as a meditation on passing by. In the draft book chapter I am presenting, I elaborate Zarathustra’s practice of passing by with regard to how he limits dialogue with others and his understanding of how certain forms of talk and silence do and do not support new-values creation. I consider the promise and limits of dialogue for significant change in shared life and, more specifically, the place of the passions in transformative talking.
Biography
Shalini Satkunanandan is a political theorist who works in the history of political thought and contemporary political theory, but also does work in legal and ethical theory. Her interdisciplinary interests were cultivated during her doctoral study in the Jurisprudence and Social Policy Program at the University of California, Berkeley, and her degrees in political science and law from the University of New South Wales, Australia. After completing her Ph.D., Satkunanandan spent three years at the University of Chicago, where she was a Harper Schmidt Fellow in the Social Sciences. Professor Satkunanandan’s research follows four lines of inquiry. First, she investigates the relationship between ethics and politics, specifically the way a political actor’s preoccupation with morality can court irresponsibility. Second, she explores the passions and orientations that might counter technocratic, legalistic, and overly instrumental approaches to politics. Third, she considers the role of religious or secularized faiths in late modern liberalism. Her fourth line of inquiry explores how we relate to and share political and other everyday spaces with those whose political and existential outlooks are different from and even opposed to our own. She is especially interested in the wisdom of disengagement—of withdrawing from dialogue, of not responding—at particular moments in political struggle. Her research is interdisciplinary and ecumenical in that it crosses divides between political, legal and ethical theory; and between Anglo-Analytic and Continental approaches to political theory.