I am part of the academic staff in the Chair of Practical Philosophy, Philosophy of Law and Social Philosophy at the Humboldt University of Berlin. At the same time, I am a member of the GRK 2638 Normativity – Critique – Change at the Free University in Berlin, where I am currently working on my dissertation under the supervision of Rahel Jaeggi and Christoph Möllers. I hold a M.A. in Philosophy from the Pontifical Catholic University of Peru, where I am a member of the Grupo de Investigación sobre Teoría Crítica and Grupo de Investigación sobre la Actualidad del Pensamiento de Hegel. I am also a member of the Red Iberoamericana Foucault.

Summer Turm 2023:

• Course "Recht und sozialer Wandel: Zur Einführung in die kritische(n) Rechtstheorie(n)" at Humboldt University Berlin

Winter term 2021/2022

• Tutor in course Ciencia y Filosofía at the Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú
• Tutor in course Temas de Filosofía Contemporánea at the Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú

Summer term 2021

• Tutor in course Ciencia y Filosofía at the Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú

Winter term 2020/2021

• Tutor in course Ciencia y Filosofía at the Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú

Winter term 2019/2020

• Tutor in course Ciencia, Ética y Cristianismo at the Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú
• Tutor in course Temas de Filosofía Contemporánea at the Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú
• Tutor in course Epistemología at the Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú
• Tutor in course Ciencia y Filosofía at the Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú
• Tutor in course Ser Humano y Cristiano en el Siglo XXI at the Pontificia Universidad Católica del
• Perú
• Tutor in course Pensamiento Cristiano y Realidad Social at the Pontificia Universidad Católica del
• Perú

Summer term 2019

• Tutor in course Ciencia, Ética y Cristianismo at the Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú
• Tutor in course Ser Humano y Cristiano en el Siglo XXI at the Pontificia Universidad Católica del
• Perú

Winter term 2018/2019

• Tutor in course Pensamiento Crítico at the Universidad Antonio Ruiz de Montoya

Law and Emancipation: Towards the Immanent Critique of a Modern Contradiction

If we understand emancipation with Horkheimer as the "sublation of social injustice", it must be noted that the claim to emancipation cannot be redeemed without the law. Emancipation was originally a legal concept: In Roman law, emancipatio referred to the process by which a child was released from the yoke of paternal authority and thus made a full citizen with legal capacity. Emancipation meant liberation from foreign domination, although the act of liberation could only be carried out by the father. In the modern world – one must only think of Marx's critique of political emancipation – the term goes beyond its original legal definition. Modern emancipation becomes a process of self-determination which spreads to the ensemble of social relations. Moreover, the realization of emancipatory claims cannot be merely granted from outside, but rather must be fought for by the subjects of emancipation themselves. The claim to emancipation thus becomes a claim to universal equality and freedom from domination. However, the concept remains tied to the law: Since equality in a comprehensive sense presupposes the legal equality of socially oppressed subjects, emancipation in modern societies also means legal emancipation, indeed emancipation through law.

In reality, the emancipatory achievements of modernity, of which the abolition of slavery is a prime example, can hardly be accounted for without legal equality. Yet the equalization of socially oppressed subjects has also provoked new forms of social injustice – namely in the medium of law. Segregation, exploitation and criminalization are legally institutionalized reactions to the abolition of slavery. With Hegel, one could therefore say that legal emancipation sublates social injustice. For through the empowering equality of socially oppressed subjects, social injustice is simultaneously negated and preserved under a different legitimizable form in the medium of law. How is this tension between law and emancipation to be understood?

In recent decades, modern law has attracted the (emancipatory) interest of Critical Theory. On the one hand, Jürgen Habermas and Axel Honneth have developed an internal critique of law. Its aim is an institutional reconciliation of the division of autonomy brought about by subjective rights. However, this constitutes a reformist model of critique that is incapable of allowing for normative discontinuity in the functional continuity of modern law. On the other hand, Christoph Menke and Daniel Loick have outlined a genealogical-radical critique of subjective rights. Since subjective rights cause a pathological distortion of the subject, the modern legal form itself must be overcome in a human way. Nevertheless, by invoking such a human overcoming, whose standards remain extrinsic to modern law, this model of critique becomes an external one. As such, it is unable to conceive of functional continuity in the normative discontinuity of modern law.

In contrast, an immanent critique understands the tension between law and emancipation as a contradiction to be endured, which brings together the normative discontinuity and functional continuity of political domination in the legal medium. In order to grasp the systematic necessity of this contradiction, which drives modern law beyond itself, a legitimation-theoretical approach is required. For the dialectic between legal emancipation and social injustice, which is structurally inherent in the medium of law, is driven by the normative-functional need for legitimization of modern domination. An immanent critique must therefore present the normativity and functionality of modern law from the perspective of a legitimation theory. Articulating such an immanent critique is the aim of my doctoral project.

Further Research interests

• Philosophy of Law
• Social Philosophy, particularly Critical Theory
• Social Pathologies
• Critique of Ideology

Academic Papers

• Maruy van den Broek, R. (Gepl. Erscheinen: 2024). Was heißt, das Recht immanent zu kritisieren? Ein methodologischer Beitrag zur Kritischen Theorie des Rechts. Archiv für Rechts- und Sozialphilosophie (ARSP). Beiheft.
• Maruy van den Broek, R. (2020). Dialéctica de la justicia: Una apología de Platón como crítico social. Estudios de filosofía (PUCP), 18, S. 112-136.
• Maruy van den Broek, R. (2019). Decir lo normal: Reflexiones en torno al trasfondo ético del lenguaje de la psiquiatría. Estudios de filosofía (PUCP), 17, S. 100-124.
• Maruy van den Broek, R. (2019). Sobre la peligrosa idea de un “libre” mercado. Tradición, Segunda época., 19, S. 46-55.
• Maruy van den Broek, R. (2019). Tres dogmas del liberalismo económico. Metanoia, 4, S. 81-106.

Book Chapters

• Maruy van den Broek, R. (2020). ¿Foucault traiciona a Canguilhem? Sujeción y subjetivación en el seno de la genealogía, in: J. Ayala-Colqui, M. Lugo Vázquez & D. Soto Núñez (Hg.), Poder y subjetivación en Michel Foucault, S. 235-246. Lima: UNMSM

Book Reviews

• Maruy van den Broek, R. (2018). Alienation [Übers. Fr. Neuhouser & A. E. Smith] – Rahel Jaeggi. Metanoia, 3, S. 103-109.
• Ester, Marvin & Maruy van den Broek, R. (2023). Theorie der Befreiung –
  Christoph Menke. Deutsche Zeitschrift für philosophische Literatur, 11
  (1), S. 24-35.

Translations

• Lorenzini, D. (2020). La emergencia del deseo: Anotaciones hacia una historia política de la voluntad [Übers. R. Maruy van den Broek], in: J. Ayala-Colqui, M. Lugo Vázquez & D. Soto Núñez (Hg.), Poder y subjetivación en Michel Foucault, S. 281-308. Lima: UNMSN/BUAP
• Sforzini, A. (2020). Poder risible, poder de la risa: Lo grotesco y lo ubuesco según Michel Foucault [Übers. R. Maruy van den Broek], in: J. Ayala-Colqui, M. Lugo Vázquez & D. Soto Núñez (Hg.), Poder y subjetivación en Michel Foucault, S. 53-68. Lima: UNMSN/BUAP

Short Essays

• Maruy van den Broek, R. (2022). Del derecho de representación a la legitimación del derecho. Cavilaciones en torno a la crisis del bicentenario peruano. Disonancia: Portal de debate y crítica social.
• Maruy van den Broek, R. (2021). ¿Estado de crisis, o crisis de Estado? Sobre democracia, poderes y resistencia en el bicentenario peruano. Disonancia: Portal de debate y crítica social.
• Maruy van den Broek, R. (2021). Contra la ilusión electoral: ¿Por quién vas a votar este 11 de abril? Disonancia: Portal de debate y crítica social.
• Maruy van den Broek, R. (2020). Resistir a la resistencia: Sobre protestas y opiniones en tiempos de crisis democrática. Disonancia: Portal de debate y crítica social.
• Maruy van den Broek, R. (2020). Coronavirus: El reto de una enfermedad social. Disonancia: Portal de debate y crítica social.
• Maruy van den Broek, R. (2019). ¿Adaptarnos al cambio? Apuntes en torno a la ausencia de alternativas frente a la crisis climática. Sílex: Ecología y Filosofía, 9, 2, S. 93-102.