首页> 外文期刊>Cultural Studies >RECOGNITION OR ETHICS?
【24h】

RECOGNITION OR ETHICS?

机译:认识还是道德?

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

White settler peoples inherit a legacy of colonial domination and Enlightenment belief in the possibilities of western universalism. This legacy makes it difficult for us to co-exist with the cultural difference of our indigenous neighbors. In this paper I search for a political practice that might co-exist with rather than deny indigenous difference. I consider the case of Aotearoa New Zealand and explore Taylor's politics of recognition and Lvinasian ethics for the guidance each offers to the practice of non-dominating modes of interaction. I argue that recognition theory does not live up to its claims for reciprocity and equality in cross-cultural engagement. Further, no political prescription can provide adequate guidance to these engagements. Rather, the ethical interruption of politics as prescribed by Lvinas provides the necessary underpinning for a non-dominating engagement with cultural difference. How ethics might productively interrupt politics is illustrated with reference to analyses of a pedagogical experiment in a culturally diverse university classroom.
机译:白人移民在西方普遍主义的可能性方面继承了殖民统治和启蒙运动的信仰。这些遗产使我们很难与土著邻居的文化差异共存。在本文中,我寻求一种可能与土著差异并存而不是否认它们的政治实践。我考虑了新西兰奥特罗阿(Aotearoa)的情况,并探讨了泰勒(Taylor)的承认政治和列维纳斯(Lvinasian)伦理,以期为非主导性互动模式的实践提供指导。我认为,承认理论不符合其在跨文化交往中互惠和平等的主张。此外,没有政治处方可以为这些活动提供适当的指导。相反,列维纳斯规定的政治上的伦理中断为非主导性的文化差异交往提供了必要的基础。结合对文化多元的大学教室中的教学实验的分析,说明了道德规范如何有效地打断政治。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
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