2012
DOI: 10.1080/13523260.2012.693776
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Constructing Ontological Insecurity: The Insecuritization of Britain's Muslims

Abstract: The development of ontological security studies, for example by Mitzen, Steele, and Berenskoetter and Giegerich, has been an important innovation in the field. However, by focusing on the level of the state rather than that of the individual, this new tradition is somewhat different from the intellectual origins of ontological security in sociology and psychology. Drawing on those disciplines, I argue that the key focus should be on the understandings of individuals about their own security, intersubjectively … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
65
0
4

Year Published

2015
2015
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
5
5

Relationship

1
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 140 publications
(71 citation statements)
references
References 11 publications
2
65
0
4
Order By: Relevance
“…As (Croft, 2012a) has argued elsewhere, the key elements of an ontological security framework are a biographical continuity, a cocoon of trust relations, self-integrity and dread, all of which apply at the level of the individual, and all of which are constructed intersubjectively. There has to be, firstly, a biographical continuity, a storyline for each individual that is both easily grasped reflexively by the individual regardless of levels of education, and also one that is easily communicable to those around.…”
Section: The Ontology Question: Intersubjectivity and The Statementioning
confidence: 99%
“…As (Croft, 2012a) has argued elsewhere, the key elements of an ontological security framework are a biographical continuity, a cocoon of trust relations, self-integrity and dread, all of which apply at the level of the individual, and all of which are constructed intersubjectively. There has to be, firstly, a biographical continuity, a storyline for each individual that is both easily grasped reflexively by the individual regardless of levels of education, and also one that is easily communicable to those around.…”
Section: The Ontology Question: Intersubjectivity and The Statementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Kinnvall 2004a, Croft 2012a, 2012b, Chernobrov 2016, as well as of the entire research field on statecraft, security issues, and diplomacy questioning realist, liberal and even constructivist theories of state agency and security (e.g. Mitzen 2006a, 2006b, Steele 2008, Rumelili 2015a, 2015b, Flockhart 2016, others have maintained that claims of ontological security foreclose important spaces of resistance, alterity, and ethical deliberations (Rossdale 2015, Browning 2016 or that research on ontological security conceptualises identity as singular and largely consistent patterns of behaviour (Lebow 2016).…”
Section: Psycho- Socio- Politico-ontological Securitymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Moreover, they caused lack of trust and sense of risk in individual level. According to Giddens, ontological security is brought about when humans are able to trust that they can bracket off all sorts of possibilities; that they can, therefore, rely on a social normality, a predictability, which then structures their practical everyday interactions as natural, healthy, and imbued with common sense (Croft, 2012). Ontological Security points to "the confidence that most human beings have in the continuity of their self-identity and the constancy of the surrounding social and material environments of action" (Giddens, 1991, pp.…”
Section: Second or High Modernity And Risk Societymentioning
confidence: 99%