Philosophy of Globalization最新文献

The Transition from Feudalism to Capitalism and the Problem of Temporalization—on the 100th Anniversary of Witold Kula’s Birth 从封建主义到资本主义的过渡与时代化问题——纪念库拉诞辰100周年

Philosophy of Globalization

Pub Date : 2018-06-11 DOI: 10.1515/9783110492415-021

Agnieszka Pufelska

The Marxist social historian Witold Kula (1916– 1988) demonstrated more thoroughly than any other scholar that the changes in the conditions of agricultural production also changed ‘historical time’. Kula describes the period between 1770 and 1880 as a transition zone in which an acceleration of historical time occurs because it does not yet correspond to experience. The historical process bursts open the old European continuum of experience, and the first category in which the temporal difference between experience and expectation is conceptualized is the term ‘progress’. He does not, however, consider this transition from the feudal to the capitalist movement pattern to be fluent. According to Kula, capitalism in most countries did not develop out of the feudal economy or as a consequence of gradual changes within the system, but developed above it as an autonomous system in the form of a superstructure. Stability through cyclicity In the last century, the transition from feudalism to capitalism has been the subject of a number of debates on both sides of the Atlantic. This was particularly the case in the 60s and 70s when the topic served to position economic history firmly within the historical sciences and philosophy. As part of this quest for the realignment of economic history as a field of research, some historians favorably disposed to philosophy were resolute in their insistence on the philosophical roots of the economic sciences, in an endeavor to secure a firm place for philosophy—or, to be more precise, for Marx’s philosophical categories—within historical studies (see as an example: Kittsteiner 1980). Those historians, on the other hand, who favored researching socio-economic structures endeavored to establish the economic sciences as a subdivision of social history, and to strip them of any budding historical-philosophical tendencies (cf. Wehler 1973). If one were to ask today any scholar of modern history interested or involved in these past debates whether he or she had been aware of an Eastern European position on this discussion, the answer would most certainly be in the affirmaAgnieszka Pufelska, Universität Potsdam (UP) OpenAccess. © 2018 Agnieszka Pufelska, published by De Gruyter. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110492415-021 Unauthenticated Download Date | 5/28/19 12:15 AM tive (in the case of Marx readers, not without a degree of cheer), and Witold Kula would be named. His books, and first and foremost his An Economic Theory of the Feudal System, were read, valued and criticized by both camps.Whereas social historians were interested in Kula’s analyses of the feudal social order, their adversaries concentrated mainly on his universal historical model of economic theory, or his dynamic functional model of the feudal economy. But who was this Polish scholar,whose feudalism theory won recognition far beyond the borders of Europe

马克思主义社会历史学家维托尔德·库拉(1916 - 1988)比其他任何学者都更彻底地证明了农业生产条件的变化也改变了“历史时间”。库拉把1770年到1880年这段时间描述为一个过渡时期，在这个时期，历史时间的加速发生了，因为它还不符合经验。历史进程打开了旧欧洲经验的连续统一体，经验和期望之间的时间差异被概念化的第一个范畴是“进步”一词。然而，他并不认为这种从封建到资本主义运动模式的转变是流畅的。根据库拉的观点，大多数国家的资本主义不是从封建经济中发展出来的，也不是作为制度内部逐渐变化的结果，而是作为一种上层建筑形式的自治制度在其之上发展起来的。在上个世纪，从封建主义到资本主义的过渡一直是大西洋两岸许多辩论的主题。这在60年代和70年代尤其如此，当时这个话题将经济史牢牢地置于历史科学和哲学之中。作为重新调整经济史作为研究领域的一部分，一些倾向于哲学的历史学家坚决坚持经济科学的哲学根源，努力为哲学——或者更准确地说，为马克思的哲学范畴——在历史研究中争取一个稳固的地位(见一个例子:Kittsteiner 1980)。另一方面，那些倾向于研究社会经济结构的历史学家努力将经济科学建立为社会历史的一个分支，并剥离任何萌芽的历史哲学倾向(参见Wehler 1973)。如果今天有人问任何对这些过去的争论感兴趣或参与其中的近代史学者，他或她是否意识到东欧在这一讨论中的立场，答案肯定是肯定的agnieszka Pufelska, Universität波茨坦(UP) OpenAccess。©2018 Agnieszka Pufelska, De Gruyter出版。本作品采用知识共享署名-非商业-非衍生品4.0许可协议。https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110492415-021未经确认的下载日期| 5/28/19 12:15 AM tive(在马克思读者的情况下，不是没有一定程度的欢呼)，和Witold Kula将被命名。他的书，首先是他的《封建制度经济理论》，被两个阵营阅读、评价和批评。社会历史学家对库拉对封建社会秩序的分析感兴趣，而他们的对手则主要关注他的经济理论的普遍历史模型，或者他的封建经济的动态功能模型。但是，这位波兰学者是谁，他的封建主义理论赢得了远在欧洲边界之外的认可?维托尔德·库拉1916年出生于华沙的一个德裔新教家庭。从华沙大学(University of Warsaw)经济学和历史系毕业后，他在一所私立大学任教，并于1939年在那里完成了博士论文答辩。在第二次世界大战期间，他是本土军的一员，被德国人俘虏。1945年，他回到波兰，立即开始了他的学术生涯。1947年，他在Łódź大学获得博士后学位(Habilitation)，之后他在巴黎获得了两年的奖学金，在那里他受到了Annales学校的影响。回国后不久，他被任命为华沙大学教授，在那里担任经济史教授，直到1975年。那时他身患重病，不得不在年仅60岁时放弃学术教学。维托尔德·库拉于1988年2月12日在华沙去世。库拉的学术工作主要包括对波兰经济史的研究，但他也对历史科学的方法论和理论问题进行了深入研究。他在这一领域最著名的著作是1963年出版的《经济史的问题和方法》。正是在这本近800页的普遍主义著作中，库拉最清晰地阐述了他的方法论。他不仅在形式上接受了马克思主义方法论的进步原则，而且接受了基于社会经济形态发展的马克思主义分期的立场。“对马克思主义者来说，”库拉写道，“因此，历史的分期同样是历史认识的综合及其工具”(库拉1963，第175页)。库拉著作的核心问题之一是经济史中的综合问题。他强调了不同社会秩序中许多经济过程的本质差异，并提请注意这些过程的有限可比性。农业劳动的强度和生产率越低，庄园领主就越想通过增加封建劳动义务来降低生产成本。封建的劳动制度减少了生产和贸易

{"title":"The Transition from Feudalism to Capitalism and the Problem of Temporalization—on the 100th Anniversary of Witold Kula’s Birth","authors":"Agnieszka Pufelska","doi":"10.1515/9783110492415-021","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110492415-021","url":null,"abstract":"The Marxist social historian Witold Kula (1916– 1988) demonstrated more thoroughly than any other scholar that the changes in the conditions of agricultural production also changed ‘historical time’. Kula describes the period between 1770 and 1880 as a transition zone in which an acceleration of historical time occurs because it does not yet correspond to experience. The historical process bursts open the old European continuum of experience, and the first category in which the temporal difference between experience and expectation is conceptualized is the term ‘progress’. He does not, however, consider this transition from the feudal to the capitalist movement pattern to be fluent. According to Kula, capitalism in most countries did not develop out of the feudal economy or as a consequence of gradual changes within the system, but developed above it as an autonomous system in the form of a superstructure. Stability through cyclicity In the last century, the transition from feudalism to capitalism has been the subject of a number of debates on both sides of the Atlantic. This was particularly the case in the 60s and 70s when the topic served to position economic history firmly within the historical sciences and philosophy. As part of this quest for the realignment of economic history as a field of research, some historians favorably disposed to philosophy were resolute in their insistence on the philosophical roots of the economic sciences, in an endeavor to secure a firm place for philosophy—or, to be more precise, for Marx’s philosophical categories—within historical studies (see as an example: Kittsteiner 1980). Those historians, on the other hand, who favored researching socio-economic structures endeavored to establish the economic sciences as a subdivision of social history, and to strip them of any budding historical-philosophical tendencies (cf. Wehler 1973). If one were to ask today any scholar of modern history interested or involved in these past debates whether he or she had been aware of an Eastern European position on this discussion, the answer would most certainly be in the affirmaAgnieszka Pufelska, Universität Potsdam (UP) OpenAccess. © 2018 Agnieszka Pufelska, published by De Gruyter. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110492415-021 Unauthenticated Download Date | 5/28/19 12:15 AM tive (in the case of Marx readers, not without a degree of cheer), and Witold Kula would be named. His books, and first and foremost his An Economic Theory of the Feudal System, were read, valued and criticized by both camps.Whereas social historians were interested in Kula’s analyses of the feudal social order, their adversaries concentrated mainly on his universal historical model of economic theory, or his dynamic functional model of the feudal economy. But who was this Polish scholar,whose feudalism theory won recognition far beyond the borders of Europe","PeriodicalId":126664,"journal":{"name":"Philosophy of Globalization","volume":"29 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-06-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"129023787","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 1

Cartographies of the ‘Eastern Question’: Some Considerations on Mapping the Sea of Marmara and the Black Sea in the Nineteenth Century “东方问题”的地图学:19世纪马尔马拉海和黑海制图的一些思考

Philosophy of Globalization

Pub Date : 2018-06-11 DOI: 10.1515/9783110492415-019

Kaan Üçsu

The Sea of Marmara, the Black Sea, and the Bosporus and Dardanelles straits have always been geographically and, therefore, politically crucial for the state ruling Istanbul. Centuries of intermittent warring between the Ottoman Empire and their enemies often pivoted on the quality of naval knowledge of this region. In this article, I aim to give an overview of how cartographical developments progressed alongside the geo-political struggles in this area, and sometimes played a role in them. I suggest that map-making was particularly important during the ‘long’ nineteenth century of the ‘Eastern Question’, which can be dramatized as a play entitled ‘The Balance of Power’, in which the Ottomans, France, Russia and Britain were the main actors to take the stage. This period was full of struggle and conflict, treaties and alliances, and ended in 1895 with establishment of the first modern cartography unit within the Ottoman military.

马尔马拉海、黑海、博斯普鲁斯海峡和达达尼尔海峡在地理上和政治上一直对统治伊斯坦布尔的国家至关重要。几个世纪以来，奥斯曼帝国与其敌人之间断断续续的战争往往以该地区海军知识的质量为中心。在这篇文章中，我的目标是概述制图学的发展是如何伴随着这一领域的地缘政治斗争而发展的，有时在其中发挥了作用。我认为，地图制作在“漫长的”19世纪的“东方问题”中尤为重要，这可以被改编成一部名为“权力平衡”的戏剧，其中奥斯曼人、法国、俄罗斯和英国是舞台上的主要演员。这一时期充满了斗争和冲突，条约和联盟，并于1895年结束，在奥斯曼军队中建立了第一个现代制图单位。

引用次数: 0

The Political Subject in Globalization: the Discussion Agency 全球化中的政治主体:讨论机构

Philosophy of Globalization

Pub Date : 2018-06-11 DOI: 10.1515/9783110492415-002

Griselda Gutiérrez Castañeda

From the defining trends of a globalized world, I expose an analysis of the systemic effects they produce in different spheres of social life, such as the guidelines that structure, in a systemic sense, the insertion of social agents, as well as the way they influence their traditional forms of intervention and participation in the course of social processes and decision-making. The trends of increasing complexity and indeterminacy inherent to globalization produce changes in the economic dynamics of the world market and effects that disrupt the institutional, legal-political frameworks of states. So, when analyzing such transformations, I take on the radicalization of the questions about the possibilities of inclusion or exclusion of the social agents, and the density of the fragmentary effects on the formation of collective identities (and, therewith, of the debate on the opportunities or restrictions of political intervention, organization and mobilization—in other words, the range of probability of their constitution as political subjects). These social and structural transformations update the basis of the theoretical, philosophical and sociological debate on the quality of the agency of social subjects, for which I consider the task of asking whether the dynamics of globalization block the possibilities of intervention of some relevance or, on the contrary, there is scope for resistance and even ways of influencing constructively. An approach to globalization Sociological research set out to characterize the organizational structures of modern-contemporary social systems tends to privilege the logic of a growing differentiation that –beyond the segmentary historical forms, or through forms of stratification—has the modality of functional differentiation, in which each subsystem (economic, political, juridical, cultural, scientific, etc.) operates according to specific languages, techniques and values, which are not commensurable, and allows for their autonomous specialty (Luhmann / De Giorggi 1993, pp. 279–339). In line with subsystems differentiation, processes of interdependence occur through functional couplings that integrate the social system, which Griselda Gutiérrez Castañeda, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México (UNAM) OpenAccess. © 2018 Griselda Gutiérrez Castañeda, published by De Gruyter. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110492415-002 Unauthenticated Download Date | 5/28/19 2:45 PM reveal a flexible and diffuse dynamic, which in turn leads to the break in the concert of the specific weight of each functional domain with causal, hierarchic or centered standards, giving rise instead to a polycentric tendency. Following this logic, the increasing processes of complexity and indeterminacy in post-industrial societies are explained, and their effects may be noticed at the level of understanding, disposition, adaptation, organization and

从全球化世界的定义趋势出发，我对它们在社会生活的不同领域产生的系统性影响进行了分析，例如在系统意义上构建社会代理人插入的指导方针，以及它们影响传统形式的干预和参与社会过程和决策的方式。全球化所固有的复杂性和不确定性日益增加的趋势使世界市场的经济动态发生了变化，并产生了破坏各国体制、法律-政治框架的影响。因此，在分析这种转变时，我采取了激进化的问题，包括社会代理人的包容或排斥的可能性，以及对集体身份形成的碎片效应的密度(以及由此产生的关于政治干预、组织和动员的机会或限制的辩论——换句话说，它们作为政治主体构成的概率范围)。这些社会和结构变革更新了关于社会主体能动性质量的理论、哲学和社会学辩论的基础，为此，我考虑的任务是询问全球化的动态是否阻碍了某种相关性干预的可能性，或者相反，是否存在抵抗的余地，甚至是建设性影响的方式。一种旨在描述现代-当代社会系统组织结构特征的全球化社会学研究方法，倾向于优先考虑日益分化的逻辑，这种逻辑超越了分段的历史形式，或通过分层的形式，具有功能分化的形态，其中每个子系统(经济、政治、法律、文化、科学等)根据特定的语言、技术和价值观运作。它们是不可通约的，并允许它们的自主专业(Luhmann / De Giorggi 1993, pp. 279-339)。根据子系统的分化，相互依赖的过程通过整合社会系统的功能耦合而发生，这是Griselda gutimacrirez Castañeda，国立大学Autónoma de mamexico (UNAM)开放获取的。©2018 Griselda guti出口额Castañeda, De Gruyter出版。本作品采用知识共享署名-非商业-非衍生品4.0许可协议。揭示了一种灵活而分散的动态，这反过来又导致了每个功能领域的具体权重与因果、层次或中心标准的协调的中断，从而产生了多中心趋势。根据这一逻辑，后工业社会中复杂性和不确定性的增加过程得到了解释，其影响可能会在社会主体的理解、处置、适应、组织和实际控制层面上被注意到。达尼洛·佐洛(Danilo Zolo)在这方面的解释(我同意)指出，空间和实践的多元化和语义专业化，在多样化和增加社会行为灵活性的同时，引入了干预变量数量的增加，这些变量耗尽了既定的智力资源的可操作性，并使理解更加不稳定。同样，这些空间之间相互依赖的增加，以及相互作用的偶然性和扩散性，在不太可能预测时阻碍了社会干预的形式，因为已知的可理解性和控制方案(例如因果关系、线性方案等，或集中化、统治/从属等标准)直到最近才作为等级结构和定义归因而有效，但却失去了有效性;确定性的指涉物正在展开。事实上，我们可以预测为什么它们被认为是规律，是根据因果图式的趋势;如果这种可能性被冲淡了，那么，在反身的意义上，我们就说不确定性。根据所谓的“社会行动领域”(韦伯)，这些领域是由基本标准和规范或公认的常规技术所规范的，根据这些标准和规范规定了定义的角色和可能的行动方案，在现在表征的“功能领域”中，这些被偶然的和灵活的标准所取代。随着共同的和制度化的信念，或鼓励或阻止行为的积极或消极的动机计划的取代，它们的位置被多价价值量表所占据，这些价值量表在这些空间中产生了容纳和定位的困难。反过来，由于经历的差异，社会流动性的范围得到了扩大，而这种差异通过阻断常规或开辟新的选择，可能会产生不安全感，并产生不稳定的影响。

{"title":"The Political Subject in Globalization: the Discussion Agency","authors":"Griselda Gutiérrez Castañeda","doi":"10.1515/9783110492415-002","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110492415-002","url":null,"abstract":"From the defining trends of a globalized world, I expose an analysis of the systemic effects they produce in different spheres of social life, such as the guidelines that structure, in a systemic sense, the insertion of social agents, as well as the way they influence their traditional forms of intervention and participation in the course of social processes and decision-making. The trends of increasing complexity and indeterminacy inherent to globalization produce changes in the economic dynamics of the world market and effects that disrupt the institutional, legal-political frameworks of states. So, when analyzing such transformations, I take on the radicalization of the questions about the possibilities of inclusion or exclusion of the social agents, and the density of the fragmentary effects on the formation of collective identities (and, therewith, of the debate on the opportunities or restrictions of political intervention, organization and mobilization—in other words, the range of probability of their constitution as political subjects). These social and structural transformations update the basis of the theoretical, philosophical and sociological debate on the quality of the agency of social subjects, for which I consider the task of asking whether the dynamics of globalization block the possibilities of intervention of some relevance or, on the contrary, there is scope for resistance and even ways of influencing constructively. An approach to globalization Sociological research set out to characterize the organizational structures of modern-contemporary social systems tends to privilege the logic of a growing differentiation that –beyond the segmentary historical forms, or through forms of stratification—has the modality of functional differentiation, in which each subsystem (economic, political, juridical, cultural, scientific, etc.) operates according to specific languages, techniques and values, which are not commensurable, and allows for their autonomous specialty (Luhmann / De Giorggi 1993, pp. 279–339). In line with subsystems differentiation, processes of interdependence occur through functional couplings that integrate the social system, which Griselda Gutiérrez Castañeda, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México (UNAM) OpenAccess. © 2018 Griselda Gutiérrez Castañeda, published by De Gruyter. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110492415-002 Unauthenticated Download Date | 5/28/19 2:45 PM reveal a flexible and diffuse dynamic, which in turn leads to the break in the concert of the specific weight of each functional domain with causal, hierarchic or centered standards, giving rise instead to a polycentric tendency. Following this logic, the increasing processes of complexity and indeterminacy in post-industrial societies are explained, and their effects may be noticed at the level of understanding, disposition, adaptation, organization and","PeriodicalId":126664,"journal":{"name":"Philosophy of Globalization","volume":"22 3 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-06-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"134380812","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

A Defense of Cooperative Cognition 为合作认知辩护

Philosophy of Globalization

Pub Date : 2018-06-11 DOI: 10.1515/9783110492415-004

M. Navarro

This article explores the extent to which our deliberative culture determines our capacity to recognize relevant knowledge, to select and value epistemic authority, or to recognize the importance of individual and/or collective epistemic achievements in a deliberative context. This investigation is especially relevant in a moment in which the formation of public opinion no longer depends exclusively on political parties. This leads to a paradoxical situation in which the diffuse energy issued by the electorate is not easily subjected to the discipline of party-oriented proposals or by media disputes that, despite their projection, may be ignored by many people. Thus, it is unclear in which sense social networks act as an alternative to the traditional system of intermediation set up by trade unions and pressure groups. By combining the approaches of deliberative democracy and social cognition theories, this essay sustains the relevance of what is defined here as ‘cooperative cognition’ in order to face this challenge.

本文探讨了我们的商议文化在多大程度上决定了我们识别相关知识的能力，选择和评估知识权威的能力，或者在商议的背景下认识到个人和/或集体知识成就的重要性的能力。在公众舆论的形成不再完全取决于政党的时刻，这项调查尤为重要。这就导致了一种矛盾的局面，即选民发出的分散能量不容易受到以政党为导向的提案的约束，也不容易受到媒体争议的约束，尽管它们的预测可能被许多人忽视。因此，社会网络在何种意义上作为工会和压力集团建立的传统中介系统的替代方案尚不清楚。通过结合协商民主和社会认知理论的方法，本文维持了这里定义的“合作认知”的相关性，以面对这一挑战。

引用次数: 0

The Thinning and Deformation of Ethical and Political Concepts in the Era of Globalization 全球化时代伦理政治观念的细化与变形

Philosophy of Globalization

Pub Date : 2018-06-11 DOI: 10.1515/9783110492415-009

C. Roldán

In contemporary literature, it is acknowledged as a fact that while we currently find ourselves facing the ‘Era of Globalization’, still very little work has been done to analyze this concept, which rather appears as a deus ex machina; as a product of the contemporary crisis, lacking political history and semantic genealogy, wanting nevertheless to become an explanatory wildcard for all present events, both in a positive and negative sense. The initial thesis of this article is that the current concept of globalization is an empty one that has been stripped of its historical content. This emptying is part of the ‘postmodern’ processes of thinning and deformation afflicting ethical-political concepts (freedom, equality, democracy) by depriving them of their ‘modern’ content without endowing any other. Taking this into account, I defend the consequent thesis that the suppression of these concepts’ semantic history implies in turn the eradication of the ethical commitment that they entailed, whose inheritance by contrast should not be renounced. I conclude that there is the need for a socio-political pedagogy that contributes to transmitting ‘responsibility for the concepts’ that are the true shapers of collective identities. Without this responsibility, our ability to adopt any other type of historical, ethical or political responsibility would be impeded. With this proposal, I want to recover in its true ‘universal’—not ‘global’—sense the Leibnizian motto ‘Theoria cum praxi’ taken up by the Enlightenment, in which a renewed philosophy of history acts as a bridge between history (memory) and politics (action), endowing both with ethical content. This article is an outcome of the projects WORLDBRIDGES (F7-PEOPLE-2013-IRSES: PIRSES-GA2013-612644); PRISMAS (FFI2013-42395-P); and NEW TRUST-CM (S2015-HUM-3466 / DER2015-

在当代文学中，公认的事实是，虽然我们目前发现自己面临着“全球化时代”，但分析这一概念的工作仍然很少，这似乎是一个神机妙计;作为当代危机的产物，缺乏政治历史和语义谱系，然而，想要成为所有当前事件的解释性通配符，无论是积极的还是消极的。本文的最初论点是，当前的全球化概念是一个被剥夺了其历史内容的空洞概念。这种空虚是“后现代”过程的一部分，它通过剥夺伦理政治概念(自由、平等、民主)的“现代”内容而不赋予任何其他内容，从而使这些概念(自由、平等、民主)变薄和变形。考虑到这一点，我为随后的论点辩护，即对这些概念的语义历史的压制反过来意味着对它们所包含的伦理承诺的根除，而伦理承诺的继承则不应被放弃。我的结论是，需要一种社会政治教育学，有助于传递“对概念的责任”，这些概念是集体身份的真正塑造者。没有这种责任，我们承担任何其他类型的历史、道德或政治责任的能力将受到阻碍。有了这个建议，我想恢复莱布尼茨的格言“理论与实践”(Theoria cum praxi)的真正“普遍”意义，而不是“全球”意义上的启蒙运动，其中一种更新的历史哲学作为历史(记忆)和政治(行动)之间的桥梁，赋予两者伦理内容。本文是WORLDBRIDGES (F7-PEOPLE-2013-IRSES: pses - ga2013 -612644)项目的成果;棱镜(ffi2013 - 42395 p);和NEW TRUST-CM (S2015-HUM-3466 / DER2015-)

{"title":"The Thinning and Deformation of Ethical and Political Concepts in the Era of Globalization","authors":"C. Roldán","doi":"10.1515/9783110492415-009","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110492415-009","url":null,"abstract":"In contemporary literature, it is acknowledged as a fact that while we currently find ourselves facing the ‘Era of Globalization’, still very little work has been done to analyze this concept, which rather appears as a deus ex machina; as a product of the contemporary crisis, lacking political history and semantic genealogy, wanting nevertheless to become an explanatory wildcard for all present events, both in a positive and negative sense. The initial thesis of this article is that the current concept of globalization is an empty one that has been stripped of its historical content. This emptying is part of the ‘postmodern’ processes of thinning and deformation afflicting ethical-political concepts (freedom, equality, democracy) by depriving them of their ‘modern’ content without endowing any other. Taking this into account, I defend the consequent thesis that the suppression of these concepts’ semantic history implies in turn the eradication of the ethical commitment that they entailed, whose inheritance by contrast should not be renounced. I conclude that there is the need for a socio-political pedagogy that contributes to transmitting ‘responsibility for the concepts’ that are the true shapers of collective identities. Without this responsibility, our ability to adopt any other type of historical, ethical or political responsibility would be impeded. With this proposal, I want to recover in its true ‘universal’—not ‘global’—sense the Leibnizian motto ‘Theoria cum praxi’ taken up by the Enlightenment, in which a renewed philosophy of history acts as a bridge between history (memory) and politics (action), endowing both with ethical content. This article is an outcome of the projects WORLDBRIDGES (F7-PEOPLE-2013-IRSES: PIRSES-GA2013-612644); PRISMAS (FFI2013-42395-P); and NEW TRUST-CM (S2015-HUM-3466 / DER2015-","PeriodicalId":126664,"journal":{"name":"Philosophy of Globalization","volume":"38 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-06-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"117284415","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

The Crisis of Historical Time at the Beginning of the Twentieth Century: An Early Counterpoint Between Benjamin and Heidegger as a Crucial Issue for Thinking Modernity, Globalization and its Historical Space 20世纪初的历史时间危机:本雅明与海德格尔的早期对位:思考现代性、全球化及其历史空间的关键问题

Philosophy of Globalization

Pub Date : 2018-06-11 DOI: 10.1515/9783110492415-032

Francisco Naishtat

引用次数: 0

Global Responsibility in a Historical Context 历史背景下的全球责任

Philosophy of Globalization

Pub Date : 2018-06-11 DOI: 10.1515/9783110492415-014

Johannes Rohbeck

Contemporary theories of globalization seldom mention history. This is surprising, because ‘globalization’ is essentially a historical term, describing as it does a historical process. There is less mention still of the philosophy of history, especially given that it has been discredited. And yet, if one probes the accounts in question more deeply, there is no overlooking that nearly all of the relevant discourses operate more or less explicitly with patterns of interpretation borrowed from the philosophy of history. The authors speculate upon which general tendencies of globalization are recognizable, and whether it is more indicative of ‘progress’ or of the ‘downfall’ of human civilization. Moreover, the questions of when globalization actually began,what is ‘new’ about the state of globality achieved thus far and what developments can be expected in future cannot possibly be answered without reflecting on history. After all, the ethical problem of global justice, which demands compensatory measures to alleviate historic harms, requires us to take into account the course of history thus far. Such topics underline that recourse to history, with all of its historico-philosophical implications, is essential if we are to resolve the problems resulting from globalization. Globalization and history Considering the phenomenon of globalization from a philosophical viewpoint, one must first note that the global has always been a theme in philosophy (Figuera 2004, p. 9; cf. Negt 2001, pp. 42; Toulmin 1994, p. 281). The search for universal concepts and principles that could claim validity for all of humankind is part of the philosophical tradition. From the (early) modern period onward, philosophically grounded human rights were intended to apply to all of the earth’s inhabitants equally and universally. In particular, the history of philosophy as it has developed since the Enlightenment proclaimed the existence of a universal or world history in which all peoples and cultures participate (Rohbeck 2010, p. 54; Brauer 2012, p. 19; Roldán 2012, pp. 83–84). This also applies to subsequent philosophies of history that distanced themselves from the ideas of progJohannes Rohbeck, Technische Universität Dresden (TUD) OpenAccess. © 2018 Johannes Rohbeck, published by De Gruyter. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110492415-014 ress and teleology, and even to the later position of posthistoire, which posits the ‘end’ of history. Contemporary theories of globalization seldom mention history. There is less mention still of the philosophy of history, especially given that it has been discredited. And yet, if one probes the accounts in question more deeply, there is no overlooking that nearly all of the relevant discourses operate more or less explicitly with patterns of interpretation borrowed from the philosophy of history. The authors speculate upon which general tendenc

当代全球化理论很少提及历史。这是令人惊讶的，因为“全球化”本质上是一个历史术语，描述的是一个历史过程。关于历史哲学的提及仍然较少，特别是考虑到它已经失去了信誉。然而，如果一个人更深入地探讨这些有问题的叙述，就不会忽视几乎所有相关的话语都或多或少地明确地运用了从历史哲学中借来的解释模式。作者推测，全球化的一般趋势是可识别的，以及它是否更多地表明人类文明的“进步”或“衰落”。此外，如果不反思历史，就不可能回答以下问题:全球化实际上是什么时候开始的，迄今为止所取得的全球化状态的“新”是什么，以及未来可以预期的发展是什么。毕竟，全球正义的伦理问题要求采取补偿性措施以减轻历史伤害，这要求我们考虑到迄今为止的历史进程。这些话题强调，如果我们要解决全球化带来的问题，求助于历史及其所有的历史哲学含义是必不可少的。从哲学的角度考虑全球化现象，我们必须首先注意到，全球化一直是哲学的一个主题(Figuera 2004, p. 9;参见Negt 2001，第42页;Toulmin 1994, p. 281)。寻找对全人类都适用的普遍概念和原则是哲学传统的一部分。从(早期)现代时期开始，以哲学为基础的人权旨在平等和普遍地适用于地球上的所有居民。特别是，自启蒙运动以来发展起来的哲学史宣称存在一种所有民族和文化都参与其中的普遍或世界历史(Rohbeck 2010，第54页;Brauer 2012，第19页;Roldán 2012, pp. 83-84)。这也适用于后来的历史哲学，它们与项目的想法保持距离，johannes Rohbeck, Technische Universität Dresden (TUD) OpenAccess。©2018 Johannes Rohbeck, De Gruyter出版。本作品采用知识共享署名-非商业-非衍生品4.0许可协议。https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110492415-014 ress和目的论，甚至到后来的postthistoire的立场，它假定历史的“终结”。当代全球化理论很少提及历史。关于历史哲学的提及仍然较少，特别是考虑到它已经失去了信誉。然而，如果一个人更深入地探讨这些有问题的叙述，就不会忽视几乎所有相关的话语都或多或少地明确地运用了从历史哲学中借来的解释模式。作者推测全球化的一般趋势是可识别的，以及它是否更多地表明了人类文明的“进步”或“衰落”(Scholte 2005, p. 49;诉Hardt / Negri 2003，第296页;Kehoane / Joseph 2005，第76页;鲍德里亚2007，第22页;Groß 2007，第16页)。这表明，全球化在很大程度上被理解为一个历史过程。全球化何时真正开始，到目前为止所达到的全球化状态有什么“新”，以及未来可以预期的发展等问题，如果不反思历史，是不可能回答的。这种全球历史视角反过来又改变了人们看待历史的方式。在传统的历史理论中，重点是历史时间，作者探讨了历史时间的概念和结构(Koselleck 1979/2004;Ricœ你1984)。历史被等同于“时间化”，相应的研究侧重于历史时代的连续性和断裂性，以及历史节奏的变化，如停滞和加速。在全球化的背景下，人们越来越关注历史空间，因此历史不仅是“时间化的”，而且是“空间化的”(Osterhammel 1998，第374页;Schlögel 2003，第12 - 13页)。当我们分析经济、政治、社会和文化空间是如何随着时间的推移而被创造出来的时候，历史就成了一个时空结构。我的论点是，全球化伦理也可以从史学和历史哲学的反思中受益。因为毫无疑问，灾难性的气候变化和全球贫困在某种程度上是相互关联的，它们都是人类在历史进程中“制造”出来的。由此可以得出应通过补偿措施纠正损害的伦理结论。目前关于这些措施的争论表明，对待历史的方式起着多么重要的作用。那些普遍反对工业国家对贫穷国家的道德责任的人已经认为历史背景无关紧要。但即使是那些认为富裕国家有义务使他们的论点独立于历史之外的人。相比之下，包括对有害行为影响的赔偿在内的更深远的责任，只能参照迄今为止的历史进程来证明是合理的。因此，我把这种责任称为“历史责任”。接下来，我们转而求助于历史，所有180个约翰内斯·罗贝克

{"title":"Global Responsibility in a Historical Context","authors":"Johannes Rohbeck","doi":"10.1515/9783110492415-014","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110492415-014","url":null,"abstract":"Contemporary theories of globalization seldom mention history. This is surprising, because ‘globalization’ is essentially a historical term, describing as it does a historical process. There is less mention still of the philosophy of history, especially given that it has been discredited. And yet, if one probes the accounts in question more deeply, there is no overlooking that nearly all of the relevant discourses operate more or less explicitly with patterns of interpretation borrowed from the philosophy of history. The authors speculate upon which general tendencies of globalization are recognizable, and whether it is more indicative of ‘progress’ or of the ‘downfall’ of human civilization. Moreover, the questions of when globalization actually began,what is ‘new’ about the state of globality achieved thus far and what developments can be expected in future cannot possibly be answered without reflecting on history. After all, the ethical problem of global justice, which demands compensatory measures to alleviate historic harms, requires us to take into account the course of history thus far. Such topics underline that recourse to history, with all of its historico-philosophical implications, is essential if we are to resolve the problems resulting from globalization. Globalization and history Considering the phenomenon of globalization from a philosophical viewpoint, one must first note that the global has always been a theme in philosophy (Figuera 2004, p. 9; cf. Negt 2001, pp. 42; Toulmin 1994, p. 281). The search for universal concepts and principles that could claim validity for all of humankind is part of the philosophical tradition. From the (early) modern period onward, philosophically grounded human rights were intended to apply to all of the earth’s inhabitants equally and universally. In particular, the history of philosophy as it has developed since the Enlightenment proclaimed the existence of a universal or world history in which all peoples and cultures participate (Rohbeck 2010, p. 54; Brauer 2012, p. 19; Roldán 2012, pp. 83–84). This also applies to subsequent philosophies of history that distanced themselves from the ideas of progJohannes Rohbeck, Technische Universität Dresden (TUD) OpenAccess. © 2018 Johannes Rohbeck, published by De Gruyter. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110492415-014 ress and teleology, and even to the later position of posthistoire, which posits the ‘end’ of history. Contemporary theories of globalization seldom mention history. There is less mention still of the philosophy of history, especially given that it has been discredited. And yet, if one probes the accounts in question more deeply, there is no overlooking that nearly all of the relevant discourses operate more or less explicitly with patterns of interpretation borrowed from the philosophy of history. The authors speculate upon which general tendenc","PeriodicalId":126664,"journal":{"name":"Philosophy of Globalization","volume":"47 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-06-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"132241908","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

A Philosophical Inquiry into the Future as a Category of Historical Time 对未来作为历史时间范畴的哲学探讨

Philosophy of Globalization

Pub Date : 2018-06-11 DOI: 10.1515/9783110492415-033

Rosa E. Belvedresi

: The significance of future as a category of historical time necessarily refers to the classical Koselleck ′ s study about the origins of history as Ge-schichte. Indeed, history proper is only possible when the time is released from the divine power, then history appears as the result of the human actions. This idea reformulates a Kantian thesis about the plan of history. As it is known, according to Kant history has a meaning and a direction but this cannot put at risk the freedom of humans as moral agents. The future plays here a main role because it allows thinking about the progress of mankind as a regulative ideal. The concept of hope is its necessarily counterpart. In the realm of practical reason the hope works as the basis for our belief in a better world caused by our collaboration (when the good and the virtue go together). In history, this hope is expressed through the expectation of perpetual peace. It is obvious that the future cannot be an object of history because to talk about it would be to make prophecies (as Danto says). But it can be said that without future there is not history in its proper sense. Our aim here is to analyze the role of future as a component of historical consciousness and consequently to show its importance to understand why the human groups build their memories as a legacy for the next generations. In order to do this I intend to identify the political aspects of the hope displayed when the communities seek to conform and keep their collective memory as a heritage to leave for future generations.

未来作为历史时间范畴的意义，必然与科塞列克关于历史起源的研究有关。的确，真正的历史只有在时间从神的力量中解放出来的时候才有可能，那时历史才会作为人类活动的结果出现。这一观点重新阐述了康德关于历史计划的论点。正如我们所知，根据康德的观点，历史是有意义和方向的，但这不能把人类作为道德主体的自由置于危险之中。未来在这里起着主要作用，因为它允许把人类的进步作为一种调节的理想来思考。希望的概念是它的必然对应。在实践理性的领域，希望是我们相信通过我们的合作(当善与德齐头并进时)会创造一个更美好的世界的基础。在历史上，这种希望是通过对永久和平的期望来表达的。很明显，未来不可能成为历史的对象，因为谈论它就等于做预言(正如丹托所说)。但是我们可以说，没有未来就没有真正意义上的历史。我们在这里的目的是分析未来作为历史意识组成部分的作用，并因此显示其重要性，以理解为什么人类群体将他们的记忆作为下一代的遗产。为了做到这一点，我打算确定当社区寻求符合并将其集体记忆作为遗产留给后代时所表现出的希望的政治方面。

{"title":"A Philosophical Inquiry into the Future as a Category of Historical Time","authors":"Rosa E. Belvedresi","doi":"10.1515/9783110492415-033","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110492415-033","url":null,"abstract":": The significance of future as a category of historical time necessarily refers to the classical Koselleck ′ s study about the origins of history as Ge-schichte. Indeed, history proper is only possible when the time is released from the divine power, then history appears as the result of the human actions. This idea reformulates a Kantian thesis about the plan of history. As it is known, according to Kant history has a meaning and a direction but this cannot put at risk the freedom of humans as moral agents. The future plays here a main role because it allows thinking about the progress of mankind as a regulative ideal. The concept of hope is its necessarily counterpart. In the realm of practical reason the hope works as the basis for our belief in a better world caused by our collaboration (when the good and the virtue go together). In history, this hope is expressed through the expectation of perpetual peace. It is obvious that the future cannot be an object of history because to talk about it would be to make prophecies (as Danto says). But it can be said that without future there is not history in its proper sense. Our aim here is to analyze the role of future as a component of historical consciousness and consequently to show its importance to understand why the human groups build their memories as a legacy for the next generations. In order to do this I intend to identify the political aspects of the hope displayed when the communities seek to conform and keep their collective memory as a heritage to leave for future generations.","PeriodicalId":126664,"journal":{"name":"Philosophy of Globalization","volume":"95 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-06-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"129620374","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

The Effect of Dependency Theory on Discussions of ‘Underdevelopment’ in Turkey 依赖理论对土耳其“欠发达”讨论的影响

Philosophy of Globalization

Pub Date : 2018-06-11 DOI: 10.1515/9783110492415-020

Rıdvan Turhan

Since the establishment of the Republic regime in 1923, one of the main discussion topics of intellectuals and of people who govern in Turkey has been ‘development’. Even though these two groups mostly had different approaches with respect to development strategy, they had a common belief that development would be achieved through industrialization. In a similar manner, the suggestions for development strategy put forward by different intellectual circles were not homogeneous. Despite all their differences, the clarity of Western paradigms forms the common point of these suggestions. Even the theoretic endeavors that have the claims of authenticity and of being domestic are not free from this effect. Approaches that try to understand and explain underdevelopment in Turkey within the theoretical frame of ‘dependency theory’ constitute one of the most typical examples of this.

自1923年共和国政权建立以来，土耳其知识分子和统治者讨论的主要话题之一就是“发展”。虽然这两个群体在发展战略方面大多有不同的做法，但他们有一个共同的信念，即通过工业化实现发展。同样，不同知识界提出的发展战略建议也不尽相同。尽管存在种种差异，但西方范式的清晰形成了这些建议的共同点。即使是主张真实性和国内性的理论努力也不能摆脱这种影响。试图在“依赖理论”的理论框架内理解和解释土耳其不发达的方法构成了这方面最典型的例子之一。

引用次数: 1

A Land of Opportunities: Foreign Engineers in the Ottoman Empire 机会之地:奥斯曼帝国的外国工程师

Philosophy of Globalization

Pub Date : 2018-06-11 DOI: 10.1515/9783110492415-018

D. Martykánová, Meltem Kocaman

Hundreds of foreign engineers worked in the vast lands of the Ottoman Empire from the eighteenth to the early twentieth century. These engineers and the works they carried out are worth exploring from the perspective of the circulation of experts in a global context. A closer look at the patterns of their employment contributes to developing a better understanding of the formation of engineering as a profession in the Ottoman context. This article studies the motives of foreign engineers for moving to the Ottoman lands, the projects they were involved in, their countries of origin and their relationships with local engineers. We argue that the presence of foreign engineers in the Ottoman lands was beneficial to all parties involved. Foreign engineers obtained prestigious jobs and brought with them access to a kind of expertise that distinguished them from their less mobile colleagues. The Ottoman Empire in turn benefited from their work and expertise at many different levels of administration, in public works, in upgrading infrastructure and in education. Foreigners had served Ottoman sultans since the early years of the Empire. There was nothing exceptional in that; anyone whose skills were considered useful could establish a relationship of personal loyalty with the sovereign, independently of his or her origins. This does not mean that being part of a specific ethnic or religious group was of no importance.While being non-Muslim could be a barrier to accessing many posts and ranks (particularly in the armed forces), certain groups were nevertheless associated with desirable knowledge and skills, and their members were sought after and their services prized for that reason. In the eighteenth century, the idea that Europe (Avrupa) was gaining important advantage over the Ottomans in specific strategic areas—such as arts and sciences linked to warfare (e.g., military drills, artillery, fortification, shipbuilding and cartography)—gained ground among the Ottoman ruling elites. This had major repercussions for the practice of employing foreigners. People coming from European countries became associated with this superior knowledge and skills, and were thus offered advantageous conditions of service. At the same time, the notion of European superiority in terms of knowledge and skills was Darina Martykánová, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid Meltem Kocaman, University of Istanbul OpenAccess. © 2018 Darina Martykánová and Meltem Kocaman, published by De Gruyter. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110492415-018 Unauthenticated Download Date | 5/28/19 4:01 AM becoming deeply rooted in the minds of the Europeans themselves, which made them more self-confident, more demanding and less willing to fully shift their allegiance and sense of belonging from a European sovereign and country to the Ottoman ruler and lands. These trends subsequently shaped patterns of recr

从18世纪到20世纪初，数以百计的外国工程师在奥斯曼帝国广阔的土地上工作。这些工程师和他们所做的工作值得从全球范围内的专家流动的角度来探讨。仔细研究他们的就业模式有助于更好地理解奥斯曼帝国背景下工程作为一种职业的形成。本文研究了外国工程师移居奥斯曼土地的动机、他们参与的项目、他们的原籍国以及他们与当地工程师的关系。我们认为，外国工程师在奥斯曼土地上的存在对有关各方都有利。外国工程师获得了声望很高的工作，并带来了一种专业知识，使他们与流动性较差的同事区别开来。奥斯曼帝国反过来又从他们在许多不同级别的行政管理、公共工程、升级基础设施和教育方面的工作和专业知识中受益。自帝国建立之初，外国人就开始为奥斯曼苏丹服务。这并没有什么特别之处;任何一个技能被认为有用的人都可以与君主建立个人忠诚的关系，而不管他或她的出身如何。这并不意味着属于某一特定种族或宗教团体不重要。虽然非穆斯林可能成为获得许多职位和军衔的障碍(特别是在武装部队中)，但某些群体仍然与理想的知识和技能联系在一起，他们的成员受到追捧，他们的服务因此受到重视。在18世纪，欧洲(Avrupa)在特定的战略领域——比如与战争相关的艺术和科学(如军事演习、火炮、防御工事、造船和制图)——获得了奥斯曼统治精英的重要优势。这对雇用外国人的做法产生了重大影响。来自欧洲国家的人与这种优越的知识和技能联系在一起，因此获得了有利的服务条件。与此同时，欧洲在知识和技能方面的优势概念是Darina Martykánová，马德里Meltem Kocaman大学Autónoma，伊斯坦布尔开放获取大学。©2018 Darina Martykánová and Meltem Kocaman, De Gruyter出版。本作品采用知识共享署名-非商业-非衍生品4.0许可协议。深深植根于欧洲人自己的思想，这使他们更加自信，要求更高，更不愿意完全改变他们的忠诚和归属感，从欧洲主权和国家到奥斯曼统治者和土地。这些趋势随后形成了招聘和服务模式(Ágoston 2005;Aksan 2002;Kacar 1996)。与过去一样，包括技术人员和军事专家在内的外国个人继续向苏丹提供他们的技能，有时是出于他们在自己国家面临的危险局势或出于可耻的个人处境而寻求庇护的需要。在这些情况下，对于那些希望融入奥斯曼军事结构的人来说，皈依伊斯兰教仍然很普遍——尽管自从匈牙利男爵费伦茨Tóth (franois de Tott)在18世纪70年代对奥斯曼军事训练进行了部分改革以来，许多外国专家被委托执行军事和海军任务，而不需要皈依伊斯兰教。当法国和奥斯曼帝国之间正式的政府间合作建立后，这一趋势进一步加强，路易十六派遣了几组专家军官和工匠，通过引进新的造船技术，重塑和加强军事教育和训练，以及武器生产，炮兵和防御工事的创新来提高奥斯曼海军和陆军的表现。这种合作在法国革命政府的领导下继续进行，后来，其他几个国家效仿法国，将他们的专家交给苏丹使用(kaparar 1996;Firges 2014)。反过来，奥斯曼统治者(以及他们高度自治的埃及附庸)开始把学生、学徒和各种民族宗教出身的专家送到外国(主要是欧洲人)的学校、作坊和军事机构，就像奥斯曼家族一样。奥斯曼帝国的基督教精英(尤其是希腊人和一些犹太团体——主要是那些与意大利有联系的人)总是把他们的儿子送到欧洲的大学，但到19世纪下半叶，这种做法被所有民族宗教团体的奥斯曼人所采用。几个强大的奥斯曼帕夏的儿子在欧洲著名的工程学校接受教育，并成为了真正的工程师:这就是穆罕默德·瑞菲克、优素福·拉兹和卡穆兰Sırrı的例子。通过政府间合作雇用外国专家具有重要的优势，最重要的是，与个人“财富寻求者”的情况不同——这些人往往夸大自己的知识和技能，或者尽管经验有限，但却把自己塑造成战略领域的专家——外国政府派来的人的专业知识得到了保证。这种做法的缺点之一是，这些外国专家向他们的政府提供关于奥斯曼军事问题的详细报告(包括战略地点的地图和防御工事的计划)，而他们的任务有时会在他们的国家改变联盟和/或与奥斯曼帝国开战时突然中断。这种类型的政府间合作一直持续到奥斯曼帝国(及以后)的结束:法国工兵兵团的高级官员被聘为奥斯曼公共工程部的技术顾问;英国皇家海军的军官在奥斯曼海军服役多年;德国和奥地利军官不仅训练奥斯曼军官，为奥斯曼官员提供建议，甚至还来指挥奥斯曼军队(Martykánová 2016-2017;Soydemir 2007;Ortaylı1981)。有时，小国的国民被明确地优先考虑，例如，1892年，奥斯曼帝国当局委托比利时将军亨利·亚历克西斯·布里阿尔蒙特起草海峡防御工事改善计划(Alloul 2017, pp. 21-22)。偶尔，外国工程师可能会发现自己陷入高度敏感的政治问题之中。他们的任务可能会造成涉及不同党派的政治和经济利益冲突，包括他们自己的国家。1845年至1858年间，黎巴嫩山地区经历了严重的政治动荡。由于多方向的斗争，包括种族和宗教冲突，中央与省的竞争，以及社区间的斗争和封建领主与村民之间的紧张关系，该地区的社会结构开始瓦解。除了奥斯曼帝国政府，法国、大英帝国、奥地利、俄罗斯和普鲁士也积极介入该地区。奥斯曼政府一直在寻找解决方案，以稳定该地区，为其人民提供安全保障，并通过与当地军队及其“保护国”谈判来征收税收。在这种情况下，出于解决政治问题的期望，政府成立了一个委员会，对该地区进行地籍调查，从而在臣民之间更公平地分配税收。两名普鲁士工程师被指派对该地区进行地籍调查。然而，不同的参与者和团体不同意该项目或不同意该项目的实施方式，他们强烈反对工程师在该地区的存在。就连普鲁士执政官也对奥斯曼政府将普鲁士臣民置于奥斯曼总督的指挥之下感到恼火，他向工程师们明确表达了自己的不满。奥斯曼当局通过指派当地人在普鲁士测量员进行侦察时护送他们，努力将这种紧张关系降到最低。尽管采取了这些措施，但两名外国工程师的生命在执行任务期间多次受到威胁(Farah 2000, pp. 477 - 487)。随着奥斯曼帝国日益融入欧洲的权力协调，以及苏丹的臣民与欧洲不同国家的国民之间的联系越来越多，奥斯曼帝国的机会之地:奥斯曼帝国的外国工程师们经常主动招募技术人员。在英国陆军情报官员Fred Burnaby(1842-1885)记录的波兰工程师Vankovitch的故事中，这种主动性发挥了关键作用。这个波兰人，后来成为奥斯曼帝国几个省份的总工程师，最有可能是特奥多尔Wańkowicz, 1846年出生于一个波兰贵族家庭，来自今天白俄罗斯明斯克附近的一个地区，也被称为特奥多尔贝伊(贝伊)。曾是沙皇臣民的Wańkowicz，毕业于圣彼得堡军事学院，是一名军事工程师。当波兰反抗俄国统治的起义(1863 - 1864年的一月起义)爆发时，他加入了叛军。他作为一群起义军的指挥官与俄国作战。起义被镇压后，Wańkowicz逃了出来，经过一段艰难的旅程，他发现自己身无分文地来到了伊斯坦布尔。为了养活自己，他开始在公司打工

{"title":"A Land of Opportunities: Foreign Engineers in the Ottoman Empire","authors":"D. Martykánová, Meltem Kocaman","doi":"10.1515/9783110492415-018","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110492415-018","url":null,"abstract":"Hundreds of foreign engineers worked in the vast lands of the Ottoman Empire from the eighteenth to the early twentieth century. These engineers and the works they carried out are worth exploring from the perspective of the circulation of experts in a global context. A closer look at the patterns of their employment contributes to developing a better understanding of the formation of engineering as a profession in the Ottoman context. This article studies the motives of foreign engineers for moving to the Ottoman lands, the projects they were involved in, their countries of origin and their relationships with local engineers. We argue that the presence of foreign engineers in the Ottoman lands was beneficial to all parties involved. Foreign engineers obtained prestigious jobs and brought with them access to a kind of expertise that distinguished them from their less mobile colleagues. The Ottoman Empire in turn benefited from their work and expertise at many different levels of administration, in public works, in upgrading infrastructure and in education. Foreigners had served Ottoman sultans since the early years of the Empire. There was nothing exceptional in that; anyone whose skills were considered useful could establish a relationship of personal loyalty with the sovereign, independently of his or her origins. This does not mean that being part of a specific ethnic or religious group was of no importance.While being non-Muslim could be a barrier to accessing many posts and ranks (particularly in the armed forces), certain groups were nevertheless associated with desirable knowledge and skills, and their members were sought after and their services prized for that reason. In the eighteenth century, the idea that Europe (Avrupa) was gaining important advantage over the Ottomans in specific strategic areas—such as arts and sciences linked to warfare (e.g., military drills, artillery, fortification, shipbuilding and cartography)—gained ground among the Ottoman ruling elites. This had major repercussions for the practice of employing foreigners. People coming from European countries became associated with this superior knowledge and skills, and were thus offered advantageous conditions of service. At the same time, the notion of European superiority in terms of knowledge and skills was Darina Martykánová, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid Meltem Kocaman, University of Istanbul OpenAccess. © 2018 Darina Martykánová and Meltem Kocaman, published by De Gruyter. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110492415-018 Unauthenticated Download Date | 5/28/19 4:01 AM becoming deeply rooted in the minds of the Europeans themselves, which made them more self-confident, more demanding and less willing to fully shift their allegiance and sense of belonging from a European sovereign and country to the Ottoman ruler and lands. These trends subsequently shaped patterns of recr","PeriodicalId":126664,"journal":{"name":"Philosophy of Globalization","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-06-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"129402642","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 4