首页> 外文期刊>Rethinking History >Theorizing emotions with Judith Butler: within and beyond the courtroom
【24h】

Theorizing emotions with Judith Butler: within and beyond the courtroom

机译:与朱迪思·巴特勒(Judith Butler)理论化的情感:在法庭内外

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Focusing upon emotion entails a potential challenge, both to hegemonic notions of the human subject and to social inquiry. That challenge consists in the opportunity afforded by research on emotion to radicalize the decentering of the subject that is at the heart of poststructuralist theorizing. An opportunity in virtue of which certain biases that continue to be instantiated in contemporary theorizations of the subject - poststructuralist ones included - could be overcome: namely, biases towards the cognitive as well as the active, as against the passive-receptive, dimensions of being alive. These biases, I argue, unproductively circumscribe our understanding of self, thereby constraining the possibilities for our ‘becoming otherwise’ (Butler 2004, 173); an endeavor I would define as being at the heart of poststructuralism qua transformative ethical project. In particular, I address several writings by Butler to argue that the increasing turn to emotions potentially confronts us with our exposure to what we cannot control; with our vulnerability. A vulnerability which the said cognitive (i.e., rationalist) and praxeological biases of contemporary theorizing - which are entailed in but not limited to poststructuralism - risk disavowing and devaluing, thereby nurturing a residual ethos of (self-)control that is contrary to the aspirations of poststructuralism, and that constitutes us as defensive, rigid, masculinist subjects. However, these ethico-political possibilities of an ‘emotional turn’ within social inquiry are unlikely to be realized as long as we understand it in terms of a mere topic for research; without opening up to its implications for what we understand to be the very point of such inquiry. The potential promise of a prospective ‘emotion studies’ thus sits side by side with the possibility that the challenge it poses will be contained in virtue of a conventional mode of conducting such research, which risks stabilizing rather than unsettling the hegemonic psycho-social order, partly in virtue of an identitarian account of the human subject.View full textDownload full textKeywordsemotions, poststructuralism, the subject, critique of ‘identity’, performativity, melancholia/melancholyRelated var addthis_config = { ui_cobrand: "Taylor & Francis Online", services_compact: "citeulike,netvibes,twitter,technorati,delicious,linkedin,facebook,stumbleupon,digg,google,more", pubid: "ra-4dff56cd6bb1830b" }; Add to shortlist Link Permalink http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13642529.2012.681192
机译:集中于情感对人类主题的霸权概念和社会探究都带来了潜在的挑战。挑战在于情感研究提供的机会,可以使主体的偏心化成为后结构主义理论化的核心。可以克服这样一个机会,在这个主题的当代理论中继续实例化某些偏见-包括后结构主义的偏见-即,偏向认知和偏向于被动的接受维度活。我认为,这些偏见非生产性地限制了我们对自我的理解,从而限制了我们“反其道而行之”的可能性(Butler 2004,173)。我将这项努力定义为处于后结构主义的转型伦理计划的核心。特别是,我在谈到巴特勒(Butler)的几篇著作时指出,越来越多的情感转向可能使我们面对无法控制的事物。与我们的脆弱性。所说的(即理性主义)和当代理论化的人为偏见(包括但不限于后结构主义)存在的脆弱性有可能遭到破坏和贬值,从而滋养了与自我追求相反的(自我)控制的残余精神。后结构主义,这构成了我们防御,僵化,男性主义的主题。但是,只要我们仅根据研究主题来理解,社会探究中“情感转向”的这些伦理政治可能性就不可能实现。并没有公开其对我们所理解的这种询问的意义。因此,前瞻性“情感研究”的潜在前景与通过传统的开展此类研究的方式所包含的挑战可能并存,从而有可能稳定而不是使霸权心理变得不安。社会秩序,部分是由于对人类主体的认同性。在线”,services_compact:“ citeulike,netvibes,twitter,technorati,可口,linkedin,facebook,stumbleupon,digg,google,更多”,发布号:“ ra-4dff56cd6bb1830b”};添加到候选列表链接永久链接http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13642529.2012.681192

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