{"title":"承认汉娜·皮特金:对善良精神的迟来发现","authors":"T. Moi","doi":"10.1086/725254","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"I had never heard of either Hanna Pitkin orWittgenstein and Justice until Linda Zerilli mentioned the book to me some time in the mid-2010s. Or so I thought. But then I noticed that Stanley Cavell singles the book out in the preface to his masterpiece The Claim of Reason, which I have been reading and rereading for years. There is no way I could have missed the reference every time I looked at that preface. Why didn’t I immediately rush out to read Pitkin’s book? If not in the 1990s, when I was first immersing myself in Wittgenstein and Cavell, then at least in the early 2010s when I was beginning to write Revolution of the Ordinary? I still have no answer. In one way, my failure to pick up Pitkin’s book is not surprising: I am a literary critic, not a political theorist. In another way, it’s astonishing that I somehowmanaged to avoid Wittgenstein and Justice (W&J) entirely for so many years. For now that I finally have read the book, I realize that fifty years ago Pitkin embarked on exactly the same kind of project that I took up in Revolution of the Ordinary. Her subtitle isOn the Significance of LudwigWittgenstein for Social and Political Thought. My subtitle isLiterary Studies afterWittgenstein, Austin, andCavell. Pitkin sets out to show other political theorists that ordinary language philosophy, which she understands as Wittgenstein’s late philosophy as analyzed and developed by Stanley Cavell, could have a transformative effect on her own discipline. In the same way, I begin Revolution of the Ordinary by declaring that ordinary language philosophy,","PeriodicalId":46912,"journal":{"name":"Polity","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Acknowledging Hanna Pitkin: A Belated Discovery of a Kindred Spirit\",\"authors\":\"T. Moi\",\"doi\":\"10.1086/725254\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"I had never heard of either Hanna Pitkin orWittgenstein and Justice until Linda Zerilli mentioned the book to me some time in the mid-2010s. Or so I thought. But then I noticed that Stanley Cavell singles the book out in the preface to his masterpiece The Claim of Reason, which I have been reading and rereading for years. There is no way I could have missed the reference every time I looked at that preface. Why didn’t I immediately rush out to read Pitkin’s book? If not in the 1990s, when I was first immersing myself in Wittgenstein and Cavell, then at least in the early 2010s when I was beginning to write Revolution of the Ordinary? I still have no answer. In one way, my failure to pick up Pitkin’s book is not surprising: I am a literary critic, not a political theorist. In another way, it’s astonishing that I somehowmanaged to avoid Wittgenstein and Justice (W&J) entirely for so many years. For now that I finally have read the book, I realize that fifty years ago Pitkin embarked on exactly the same kind of project that I took up in Revolution of the Ordinary. Her subtitle isOn the Significance of LudwigWittgenstein for Social and Political Thought. My subtitle isLiterary Studies afterWittgenstein, Austin, andCavell. Pitkin sets out to show other political theorists that ordinary language philosophy, which she understands as Wittgenstein’s late philosophy as analyzed and developed by Stanley Cavell, could have a transformative effect on her own discipline. In the same way, I begin Revolution of the Ordinary by declaring that ordinary language philosophy,\",\"PeriodicalId\":46912,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Polity\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-05-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Polity\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1086/725254\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"POLITICAL SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Polity","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1086/725254","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
Acknowledging Hanna Pitkin: A Belated Discovery of a Kindred Spirit
I had never heard of either Hanna Pitkin orWittgenstein and Justice until Linda Zerilli mentioned the book to me some time in the mid-2010s. Or so I thought. But then I noticed that Stanley Cavell singles the book out in the preface to his masterpiece The Claim of Reason, which I have been reading and rereading for years. There is no way I could have missed the reference every time I looked at that preface. Why didn’t I immediately rush out to read Pitkin’s book? If not in the 1990s, when I was first immersing myself in Wittgenstein and Cavell, then at least in the early 2010s when I was beginning to write Revolution of the Ordinary? I still have no answer. In one way, my failure to pick up Pitkin’s book is not surprising: I am a literary critic, not a political theorist. In another way, it’s astonishing that I somehowmanaged to avoid Wittgenstein and Justice (W&J) entirely for so many years. For now that I finally have read the book, I realize that fifty years ago Pitkin embarked on exactly the same kind of project that I took up in Revolution of the Ordinary. Her subtitle isOn the Significance of LudwigWittgenstein for Social and Political Thought. My subtitle isLiterary Studies afterWittgenstein, Austin, andCavell. Pitkin sets out to show other political theorists that ordinary language philosophy, which she understands as Wittgenstein’s late philosophy as analyzed and developed by Stanley Cavell, could have a transformative effect on her own discipline. In the same way, I begin Revolution of the Ordinary by declaring that ordinary language philosophy,
期刊介绍:
Since its inception in 1968, Polity has been committed to the publication of scholarship reflecting the full variety of approaches to the study of politics. As journals have become more specialized and less accessible to many within the discipline of political science, Polity has remained ecumenical. The editor and editorial board welcome articles intended to be of interest to an entire field (e.g., political theory or international politics) within political science, to the discipline as a whole, and to scholars in related disciplines in the social sciences and the humanities. Scholarship of this type promises to be highly "productive" - that is, to stimulate other scholars to ask fresh questions and reconsider conventional assumptions.