首页> 外文期刊>Journal for Cultural Research >Stiegler, Habermas and the Techno-logical Condition of Man
【24h】

Stiegler, Habermas and the Techno-logical Condition of Man

机译:施蒂格勒,哈贝马斯与人类的技术条件

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

In his multi-volume work Technics and Time Bernard Stiegler forges a new and highly original understanding of the relation between the human and technics. By thinking of technics as organized inorganic matter endowed with a proper dynamic and constitutive of temporality, Stiegler considers the evolution of technics as mutually constitutive with the evolution of the human. Moreover, Stiegler claims that this notion of “originary technicity” has been systematically disavowed by the philosophical tradition as a result of which it has always tended to oppose technics to the human. Starting from a discussion of Stiegler's critical engagement with the paleontologist Andr Leroi-Gourhan, this article aims at expanding its bearing to Jrgen Habermas's theory of technics, a possibility at which Stiegler himself hints but which he does not pursue. It will be argued that the opposition Leroi-Gourhan draws between technical consciousness and symbolic consciousness reappears in Habermas's writings as that between “work” and “interaction” or “purposive-rational action” and “communicative action”.
机译:在他的多卷著作《技术和时间》中,伯纳德·斯蒂格勒对人与技术之间的关系有了新的高度原创的理解。通过将技术视为具有适当的时间动态性和本构性的有组织的无机物,斯蒂格勒认为技术的发展与人类的进化是互为本构的。此外,斯蒂格勒声称,“传统技术”这一概念已被哲学传统系统地否定了,因此,它一直倾向于反对人类使用技术。从对斯蒂格勒与古生物学家安德鲁·莱罗伊·古尔汉的重要接触进行讨论开始,本文旨在将其范围扩大到赫尔根·哈贝马斯的技术理论上,斯蒂格勒本人暗示了这种可能性,但他并未追求。有人认为,反对派利罗伊·古汉在哈贝马斯的著作中重新出现在技术意识和象征意识之间,即在“工作”与“互动”或“目的理性行动”与“交往行动”之间。

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