Editing Negative capability (section)

===Roberto Mangabeira Unger, 2004===
In 2004, Brazilian philosopher [[Roberto Mangabeira Unger]] appropriated Keats' term in order to explain resistance to rigid social divisions and hierarchies where negative capability was the denial of whatever delivered over to a fixed scheme of division and hierarchy and to an enforced choice between routine and rebellion. Negative capability could empower against social and institutional constraints, and loosen the bonds entrapping people in a certain social station.<ref name="Unger">{{Cite book |last=Unger |first=Roberto |title=False Necessity: Anti-Necessitarian Social Theory in the Service of Radical Democracy, Revised Edition |publisher=Verso |year=2004 |isbn=978-1-85984-331-4 |location=London}}</ref>{{rp|279–280, 632}}

Unger claimed an example of negative capability could be seen in industrial innovation, when modern industrialist could not just become more efficient with surplus extraction based on pre-existing work roles, but needed to invent new styles of flexible labor, expertise, and capital management, by inventing new restraints upon labor, such as length of the work day and division of tasks. Unger claimed industrialists and managers who were able to break old forms of organizational arrangements exercised negative capability.<ref name="Unger"/>{{rp|299–301}}

Negative capability is a key component in Unger's theory of [[false necessity]] and [[formative context]]. The theory of false necessity claims that social worlds are the artifact of human endeavors. In order to explain how people move from one formative context to another without the conventional social theory constraints of historical necessity (e.g. feudalism to capitalism), and to do so while remaining true to the key insight of individual human empowerment and [[anti-necessitarian social thought]], Unger recognized an infinite number of ways of resisting social and institutional constraints, which could lead to an infinite number of outcomes. This variety of forms of resistance and [[empowered democracy|empowerment]] (i.e. negative capability) would make change possible.<ref name="Unger"/>{{rp|35–36, 164, 169, 278–80, 299–301}}

According to Unger negative capability addresses the problem of [[agency (sociology)|agency]] in relation to [[social structure|structure]] and unlike other theories of [[structure and agency]], negative capability would not reduce the individual to a simple actor possessing only the dual capacity of compliance or rebellion.<ref name="Unger"/>{{rp|282}}