What is Chinese hip-hop? How is its authenticity negotiated and contested in China? Instead of seeing Chinese hip-hop as a given cultural form that follows a singular trajectory, this chapter conceptualizes it as a precarious cultural formation suspended by competing claims to authenticity and overdetermined by divergent forces, such as the hip-hop communities, the state, and commercial forces. The broadcast of The Rap of China in 2017 was a decisive moment in the massification of hip-hop in China, in which the subcultural genre was domesticated, commercialized, and re-infused with hegemonic ideology. Focusing on the televisual remediation of hip-hop in China, this chapter illuminates how battles for authenticity have been fought out among different actors or groups, how tensions between the ethos and the techne of hip-hop unfold, and how censorship and propaganda imperatives delimit the contours of the genre’s representation to the mass audience. It problematizes the line between “the underground” and the mainstream, while foregrounding the process in which different horizons of hip-hip negotiate with one another, co-shaping what is visible, audible, and commendable. The issues discussed in this chapter will likely remain central to the development and dilemma of Chinese hip–hop in the years to come.

Writings on hip hop education from hip-hop’s golden age onwards have often concerned themselves with the relationship between educational institutions, pedagogic practices and spaces and the vernacular identities and multicultural literacies of their disadvantaged students. This parallels and is related to the contentious educational debates that erupted during the so-called US culture wars of the 1990s concerning race, cultural identity, relevance and value. Accordingly, the chapter argues that a chief source of hip-hop education’s legitimacy derives from an abiding insistence amongst its practitioners and advocates that the more ostensibly “positive” and “conscious” examples of rap, in keeping with the black cultural continuum, express hip-hop’s inherent didacticism. I describe and examine these issues and their methodological and pedagogic claims – past and present – against a backdrop of moral panic that has long dogged rap music but also supplied it with critical impetus. The final section of the chapter offers a case-study of a recent British hip-hop education programme that seeks to make use of UK drill music to develop the capacities of educationally disaffected school-age young people.

Political legitimacy entails a process of evaluation and eventually of judgment concerning whether or not, and to what extent, the exercise of political power (institutions, leadership, policies, and results) meets the conditions required by legitimacy. Despite the importance of the contribution of law to legitimacy, legitimacy cannot be purely and simply identified with and reduced to law. This is, in part, the case because law functions as an expression and vector of two other components of political legitimacy: values and consent. As such, this chapter is organized into three parts. First, I examine the meaning of values and consent and of their relationship in general. Second, I refer to the challenges that can be associated with values and consent. Third, I show how values and consent, provided that they are not the captives of these challenges, can operate as sources and criteria of evaluation and judgment of political legitimacy.

This chapter refutes three interrelated feminist objections to Heidegger’s thought. Section 6.1 argues that the analytic of Dasein should not be seen as the elaboration of an implicitly masculine exemplar, but rather that it is the articulation of a structural essence, which can and has been productively employed by feminist philosophers. Section 6.2 suggests that far from erasing the issue of gender at an ontological level, Heidegger’s understanding of Dasein’s neutrality speaks to an anti-essentialist critique of binary gender. Finally, Section 6.3 offers an interpretation of authenticity as a form of genuine self-understanding – similar to Sandra Lee Bartky’s notion of developing a ‘feminist consciousness’ – which can work to critique and transform role-based relations and ‘inauthentic’ understandings prescribed by das Man. The aim of this chapter is thus to demonstrate that far from being inimical to feminist theorizing, Being and Time can be a fruitful resource for furthering feminist projects.

Authenticity plays key methodological and normative roles for early Heidegger: as he puts it, to ‘work out the question of Being adequately … we must make an entity – the inquirer – transparent in his own Being’. But the precise nature of those roles, and how Heidegger differs from other thinkers of authenticity, is much less clear. This chapter considers three possible interpretations of authenticity found in the contemporary literature. On a transcendental reading, authenticity is what allows us to first recognize reasons as such and act in light of norms at all. On a unity reading, authenticity unifies Dasein’s commitments, and thereby grants a special narrative or judgmental coherence to my life. Finally, on the structural reading, ultimately defended here, authenticity is an inchoate awareness of the structural features of normative space and of Dasein’s own way of being. It is only this interpretation, it is argued, that can make sense of Heidegger’s text and the centrality of authenticity within his early work.

Heidegger’s subordination of reason to “care” in Being and Time has exposed him to the charge of irrationalism. Against this view, I argue that Being and Time offers a “normativity-first” account in which reason, as reason-giving (logon didonai), is an ineluctable demand constitutive of authentic selfhood. Examining Heidegger’s rejection of the neo-Kantian equation of reason with logic in his 1929 Kantbuch, I explain the threads that connect what Heidegger calls “pure sensible reason” to his extensive phenomenological account, in Being and Time, of the “everyday” and “authentic” modes of Dasein’s care-structure. As authenticity’s discursive mode, the “call of conscience” is Dasein’s portal into normative space. As the essay “On the Essence of Ground” makes plain, Dasein’s response to the call involves answerability for what it holds to be best in its practical life, hence reason-giving. Such an origin of reason contrasts with rationalism only in eschewing any principle of sufficient reason.

The issue of whether technology is inherently motivating for learners and teachers has often been discussed in the literature around computers and language learning. Yet, there is more to this relationship than initially meets the eye. This chapter outlines the ways in which symbolic power plays a part in both personal and institutional motivations for the adoption of technology. The chapter also looks at the way motivation is often credited as a key to success, though rarely with much empirical evidence. Finally, the article takes on a practitioner’s viewpoint to share several motivational techniques that can assist with practice and research.

Part of the fascination of Being and Time is that it seeks to weave together so many different strands of thought. But unsurprisingly, its readers also worry that such a work must subject itself to such strain that ultimately it itself must unravel. Key tensions are between the outlooks of three figures: Heidegger the pragmatist, Heidegger the existentialist, and Heidegger the philosopher of being. Seeing how openness to our concerns as a whole is both necessary for authenticity and reveals a unified horizon against which entities with different ways of being show themselves, dissipates these apparent tensions. Recognition of the mediating role played by a conception of the good – that Heidegger’s reading of Aristotle and Augustine inspired – helps make clear that authenticity is both compatible with the practical embeddedness of our concerns and reveals a form of understanding necessary for ontology to be possible.

Heidegger’s account of death plays a crucial role in the argument of Being and Time. There is, however, no broad consensus on how best to understand this account. An adequate interpretation of Heideggerian death should, first, explain how Heidegger distinguishes death from other phenomena such as “demise,” “perishing,” and “dying.” An adequate interpretation should also explain how relating to death in the right way transforms our existence – individualizing us and enabling an authentic form of being-in-the-world. In this chapter, I critique the “existential death interpretation” of Heideggerian death, and offer an alternative account – a modal interpretation. According to the modal interpretation, the death-demise distinction should be understood as the distinction between a possibility and an event that actualizes that possibility. The import of death is found in the way death modalizes all our other possibilities.

This chapter explores the connection between Heidegger’s existentialism and fundamental ontology. Specifically, and contra John Haugeland who argues that existentialism is a key feature of fundamental ontology insofar as taking responsibility for our existence entails getting the being of entities right, this chapter argues that taking responsibility for our existence explicitly exhibits the temporal horizon that is fundamental for all our purpose activities and our understanding of entities, generally.

This case study of gender in advertising through the lens of two campaigns – one by Virgin Atlantic and one by Bud Light – examines these brands’ alignment with modern gender perceptions and the subsequent consumer responses. It considers how advertising mirrors or moulds society’s gender norms and how companies navigate this spectrum. Beginning with Virgin Atlantic’s ‘See the World Differently’ campaign and updated gender-identity policy in 2022, this example indicates the campaign’s success in its positive reception. Conversely, Bud Light’s collaboration with trans activist Dylan Mulvaney for the ‘Easy Carry Contest’ faced a polarised reception. While aiming to resonate with a younger, more inclusive demographic, the backlash from conservative corners illustrated the risks involved when a brand ventures into socially charged territories without thorough consideration of its diverse customer base.

The comparison between Virgin Atlantic’s holistic approach to embedding inclusivity into their brand ethos contrasts with Bud Light’s reactive stance, highlighting the importance of proactive engagement with social issues in brand strategy.

This chapter explores how value creation is shifting. Amidst the saturated media environment where consumer attention is a prized commodity, brands face the challenge of standing out and maintaining relevance. Traditional metrics of competition such as price and quality are no longer sufficient differentiators; instead, brands are increasingly evaluated by their contributions to society and the authenticity of their engagement in cultural and social issues. In articulating the complexity of value in the context of brand and society, this chapter suggests that value is not merely about economic transactions but also involves co-creation with consumers and societal impact. It explores how brands are moving beyond traditional corporate social responsibility (CSR) towards more polarising and purpose-driven stances: that is, engaging in brand activism. This new dynamic places brands as facilitators of change, influencing culture and engaging with consumers on deeper ethical and moral grounds. Brand activism has implications on consumer perception and loyalty, where the importance of authenticity in brand activism is picked up on by consumers and can drive meaningful consumer/brand connections.

This chapter considers the significance of authenticity in the context of branding and consumer behaviour. Authenticity is a complex construct that cannot be directly measured or calculated like other marketing metrics. It is particularly valued during times of change and uncertainty, serving not just as a unique selling proposition for brands but also as a means for consumers to align their choices with their self-identity and self-projection, underscoring the importance of consistency, conformity, and connection in understanding authenticity. These aspects not only help in defining what is ‘authentic’ but also demonstrate the strategic use of authenticity by brands to establish themselves as landmarks within the cultural landscape of consumers.

This chapter explores how perceived authenticity, influenced by a consumer’s narrative of self-identity and self-projection, aids in navigating the cultural landscape. This navigation involves using brands as landmarks to move closer to, or further from, consumers’ ‘authentic’ selves, thereby underscoring the crucial role that brand authenticity plays in consumers’ lives.

The second case study in this book offers a deep dive into the brand activism of two distinct entities: the fashion giant Kate Spade and the social enterprise organisation Change Please. These two brands show how brand activism, especially when authentically aligned with a brand’s mission, can significantly influence targeted societal groups. Kate Spade is highlighted as a brand with activism ingrained in its DNA, focussing on women’s empowerment and mental health. Change Please is showcased as a social enterprise born with a mission to tackle homelessness through the daily habit of coffee drinking. It demonstrates how a brand built on social activism can enable significant societal change while operating a sustainable business model. Furthermore, this chapter indicates the importance of partnerships in amplifying brand activism, showing how Kate Spade and Change Please exemplify the ways in which brands can serve as navigational landmarks for consumers, and thus providing a blueprint for other entities seeking to embed activism into their business models.