首页> 外文学位 >A social critique of reflexive reason: Relocating critical theory after Habermas and Foucault (Juergen Habermas, Michel Foucault).
【24h】

A social critique of reflexive reason: Relocating critical theory after Habermas and Foucault (Juergen Habermas, Michel Foucault).

机译:对反思性理性的社会批判:在哈贝马斯和福柯之后重新定位批判理论(尤尔根·哈贝马斯,米歇尔·福柯)。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

This study clarifies the role reflection should play in ethical and political life. Today individuals are increasingly called on to utilize their reflective capacities, but without the Socratic assurance that the examined life will be more fit for living than the unexamined life.; Chapter One introduces the concept of reflexivity in theorizing reflection under current philosophical assumptions. Internalist conceptions of reflexivity focus on the skill of agents to adopt a reflective stance through mutual dialogue. Externalist conceptions of reflexivity take a distanciating stance toward dialogue and communication.; Chapters Two and Three examine Habermas's synthesis of internalism and externalism. The reflexive use of communication provides his starting point, whereas externalism enables him to explain how existing social conditions prevent reflexivity's normative-rational potential from being realized. I criticize his assumption that externalism need only explain what prevents reason from being realized, since the realization of reason may itself sustain conflict and inequality. Contestation is endemic to reflexive practice, it is not incidental to, nor is it the "other" of, reflexivity. My critique yields the thesis that reflexive reason is a highly structured, socially contested product. This thesis bears on today's conflicts over reflexive participation, including social movements and initiatives for holding economic institutions publicly accountable. Pace Habermas, these conflicts are not only about social systems that block agents' reflexive participation; instead, they are also about which forms reflexive participation should assume.; Chapters Four and Five present Foucault's genealogies as an externalist critique of reflexive agency. Contrary to the interpretation that genealogy dispenses with agency and precludes critique, I argue that our constitution as reflexive agents, and our capacity for taking normative stances and critical action, concern Foucault profoundly. His goal is to reveal how we ourselves sustain power in multiple, if not always apparent ways. By making our responsibility for current conditions more apparent, genealogy also calls on us to take cognizance of and active responsibility for the power relations we uphold. Through an analysis of "the care of the self," genealogy's critical and normative stance is elaborated as an art of living, as a self-distanciating practice of the examined life.
机译:这项研究阐明了反思在道德和政治生活中应发挥的作用。今天,人们越来越多地被要求利用他们的反思能力,但是没有苏格拉底式的保证,被检验的生活比未经检验的生活更适合生活。第一章介绍了在当前哲学假设下对反射进行理论化的自反性概念。反思的内在主义概念集中于特工通过相互对话采取反思立场的技巧。外在主义的反身概念对对话和交流持明显的立场。第二章和第三章探讨了哈贝马斯对内部主义和外部主义的综合。反思性地使用交流提供了他的出发点,而外在主义则使他能够解释现有的社会条件如何阻止反思性的规范理性潜力得以实现。我批评他的假设,即外在主义只需要解释阻止理性得以实现的原因,因为理性的实现本身可能会维持冲突和不平等。竞赛是反思性练习的地方性知识,它不是反思性的附带事件,也不是反思性的“其他”事件。我的批评得出这样一个论点,即反身理性是一种高度结构化的,在社会上引起争议的产品。本文论证了当今关于反身参与的冲突,包括社会运动和要求经济机构公开承担责任的倡议。佩斯·哈贝马斯(Pace Habermas),这些冲突不仅与阻碍特工自反参与的社会制度有关;相反,他们还考虑自反参与应该采用哪种形式。第四章和第五章将福柯的家谱描述为反思性代理的外在批判。与家谱学摒弃代理并避免批判的解释相反,我认为,我们作为反身代理人的宪法以及我们采取规范性立场和采取批判行动的能力与福柯深感关连。他的目标是揭示我们自己如何以多种(即使并非总是显而易见的)方式维持权力。通过使我们对当前状况的责任更加明显,家谱学还呼吁我们对我们所坚持的权力关系承担责任并承担积极责任。通过对“对自我的关心”的分析,家谱学的批判性和规范性立场被阐述为一种生活艺术,是对被检验生活的一种自我区分的实践。

著录项

  • 作者

    Hendrickson, Paul Sheldon.;

  • 作者单位

    University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.;

  • 授予单位 University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.;
  • 学科 Philosophy.
  • 学位 Ph.D.
  • 年度 2001
  • 页码 219 p.
  • 总页数 219
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类 哲学理论;
  • 关键词

  • 入库时间 2022-08-17 11:47:19

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号