走向相互承认:Ricoeur对抗koj

Ekaterina Shashlova
{"title":"走向相互承认:Ricoeur对抗koj<e:1>","authors":"Ekaterina Shashlova","doi":"10.14195/0872-0851_64_13","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this article, we examine two philosophical theories of recognition: those of Paul Ricoeur and Alexandre Kojève. We trace this line of development in the theory of recognition as a return from Ricoeur to Kojève. Our hypothesis is that over the past twenty years, the theory of recognition has undergone a change in content and has transformed into a theory of misrecognition. In turn, the theory of misrecognition is grounded in the struggle between subjects and brings us back to the discourse of the struggle between the Slave and the Master. This transformation from struggle to reciprocity and vice versa, we argue, suggests that a theory of identity formation as a process of resistance to assujettissement is in demand at this moment in history. In the 2010s, as the theory of misrecognition took shape primarily in the English‑speaking world, the constitution of the subject began to be understood once again as the outcome of struggles within feminist, Marxist, and other emancipatory theories. We examine both Ricoeur’s arguments against Kojève, Althusser, and the theory of misrecognition in general, as well as the «return» of Kojève’s arguments in the contemporary theory of misrecognition.","PeriodicalId":52758,"journal":{"name":"Revista Filosofica de Coimbra","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Towards mutual recognition: Ricoeur against Kojève\",\"authors\":\"Ekaterina Shashlova\",\"doi\":\"10.14195/0872-0851_64_13\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In this article, we examine two philosophical theories of recognition: those of Paul Ricoeur and Alexandre Kojève. We trace this line of development in the theory of recognition as a return from Ricoeur to Kojève. Our hypothesis is that over the past twenty years, the theory of recognition has undergone a change in content and has transformed into a theory of misrecognition. In turn, the theory of misrecognition is grounded in the struggle between subjects and brings us back to the discourse of the struggle between the Slave and the Master. This transformation from struggle to reciprocity and vice versa, we argue, suggests that a theory of identity formation as a process of resistance to assujettissement is in demand at this moment in history. In the 2010s, as the theory of misrecognition took shape primarily in the English‑speaking world, the constitution of the subject began to be understood once again as the outcome of struggles within feminist, Marxist, and other emancipatory theories. We examine both Ricoeur’s arguments against Kojève, Althusser, and the theory of misrecognition in general, as well as the «return» of Kojève’s arguments in the contemporary theory of misrecognition.\",\"PeriodicalId\":52758,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Revista Filosofica de Coimbra\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Revista Filosofica de Coimbra\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.14195/0872-0851_64_13\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revista Filosofica de Coimbra","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14195/0872-0851_64_13","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在这篇文章中,我们考察了两种哲学的承认理论:保罗·里科尔和亚历山大·科约里夫的理论。我们在承认理论中追溯这条发展路线,将其视为从利科尔到科约的回归。我们的假设是,在过去的二十年里,认知理论经历了内容的变化,已经转变为误认理论。反过来,误认理论是建立在主体之间的斗争基础上的,并将我们带回到奴隶与主人之间斗争的话语中。我们认为,这种从斗争到互惠的转变,以及反之亦然的转变表明,在这个历史时刻,需要一种身份形成理论,作为一种抵抗主观组织的过程。在2010年代,随着误认理论主要在英语世界形成,主体的构成开始再次被理解为女权主义、马克思主义和其他解放理论内部斗争的结果。我们考察了利科尔反对科伊、阿尔都塞的论证和一般的误认理论,以及科伊的论证在当代误认理论中的“回归”。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Towards mutual recognition: Ricoeur against Kojève
In this article, we examine two philosophical theories of recognition: those of Paul Ricoeur and Alexandre Kojève. We trace this line of development in the theory of recognition as a return from Ricoeur to Kojève. Our hypothesis is that over the past twenty years, the theory of recognition has undergone a change in content and has transformed into a theory of misrecognition. In turn, the theory of misrecognition is grounded in the struggle between subjects and brings us back to the discourse of the struggle between the Slave and the Master. This transformation from struggle to reciprocity and vice versa, we argue, suggests that a theory of identity formation as a process of resistance to assujettissement is in demand at this moment in history. In the 2010s, as the theory of misrecognition took shape primarily in the English‑speaking world, the constitution of the subject began to be understood once again as the outcome of struggles within feminist, Marxist, and other emancipatory theories. We examine both Ricoeur’s arguments against Kojève, Althusser, and the theory of misrecognition in general, as well as the «return» of Kojève’s arguments in the contemporary theory of misrecognition.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
35 weeks
期刊最新文献
O real — no conhecimento A excepção Derrida – O “eleito secreto” dos animais A veia onto-antropo-teo-lógica em questão Ricoeur between Ithaca and the isle of the Phaecians Petrus de Alvernia, Quaestiones Super I‑VIII Libros Politicorum. A Critical Edition and Study by Marco Toste, (Leuven/Louvain: Leuven University Press, Ancient and Medieval Philosophy Series 1: LXI, 2022). ISBN: 978-94-6270-318-6. 902 pp. Jean-Paul Coujou, Suárez dans l’Histoire de la Métaphysique. Volume 1: L’Héritage et le débat contemporain, (Collection Carte Blanche), (Toulouse: Entremises Éditions, 2022). ISBN: 978-2-38255-037-3. 237 pp.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1