{"title":"在非洲社群主义框架内限制破坏性情绪的空间","authors":"Mary Carman","doi":"10.1080/17449626.2021.2021274","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Bernard Matolino has recently argued that African communitarianism is an ethics grounded in emotion aligned with reason. If he is correct, questions arise about what emotions have value within African communitarianism, especially as emotions like anger or resentment could stand in tension with important communitarian values, such as social harmony. While little critical attention has so far been paid to such emotions within an African communitarian framework, a wider philosophical literature examining the moral value of disruptive emotions could be drawn on to develop analyses of emotion within African communitarianism. In this paper, I explore how such an analysis could proceed. I argue that drawing on the wider emotion literature, and especially the concept of reactive attitudes introduced by P. F. Strawson, provides an initial case for even disruptive emotions to have value. Even so, we must question whether an analysis of emotion plausibly based on individualistic commitments is compatible with relational communitarian commitments. I nevertheless defend the compatibility and argue that, not only can disruptive emotions have instrumental value through their epistemic and motivational roles in the promotion of community but, importantly, they are partially constitutive of the interpersonal relationships within which we are embedded and that form community.","PeriodicalId":35191,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Global Ethics","volume":"18 1","pages":"386 - 402"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Circumscribing the space for disruptive emotions within an African communitarian framework\",\"authors\":\"Mary Carman\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/17449626.2021.2021274\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT Bernard Matolino has recently argued that African communitarianism is an ethics grounded in emotion aligned with reason. If he is correct, questions arise about what emotions have value within African communitarianism, especially as emotions like anger or resentment could stand in tension with important communitarian values, such as social harmony. While little critical attention has so far been paid to such emotions within an African communitarian framework, a wider philosophical literature examining the moral value of disruptive emotions could be drawn on to develop analyses of emotion within African communitarianism. In this paper, I explore how such an analysis could proceed. I argue that drawing on the wider emotion literature, and especially the concept of reactive attitudes introduced by P. F. Strawson, provides an initial case for even disruptive emotions to have value. Even so, we must question whether an analysis of emotion plausibly based on individualistic commitments is compatible with relational communitarian commitments. I nevertheless defend the compatibility and argue that, not only can disruptive emotions have instrumental value through their epistemic and motivational roles in the promotion of community but, importantly, they are partially constitutive of the interpersonal relationships within which we are embedded and that form community.\",\"PeriodicalId\":35191,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Global Ethics\",\"volume\":\"18 1\",\"pages\":\"386 - 402\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Global Ethics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/17449626.2021.2021274\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Global Ethics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17449626.2021.2021274","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
摘要
伯纳德•马托利诺最近提出,非洲社群主义是一种建立在情感和理性基础上的伦理。如果他是正确的,那么在非洲的社群主义中,什么样的情感是有价值的问题就出现了,尤其是像愤怒或怨恨这样的情感可能与重要的社群主义价值观(如社会和谐)相冲突。虽然到目前为止,对非洲社群主义框架内的这种情绪的批评关注很少,但可以利用更广泛的哲学文献来研究破坏性情绪的道德价值,以发展对非洲社群主义内部情绪的分析。在本文中,我将探讨如何进行这样的分析。我认为,借鉴更广泛的情感文献,尤其是P. F.斯特劳森(P. F. Strawson)引入的反应性态度概念,为破坏性情绪也有价值提供了一个初步案例。即便如此,我们必须质疑,貌似基于个人主义承诺的情感分析是否与关系主义承诺相容。尽管如此,我还是为这种兼容性辩护,并认为,破坏性情绪不仅可以通过其在促进社区方面的认知和动机作用而具有工具价值,而且重要的是,它们部分构成了我们所嵌入的人际关系,并形成了社区。
Circumscribing the space for disruptive emotions within an African communitarian framework
ABSTRACT Bernard Matolino has recently argued that African communitarianism is an ethics grounded in emotion aligned with reason. If he is correct, questions arise about what emotions have value within African communitarianism, especially as emotions like anger or resentment could stand in tension with important communitarian values, such as social harmony. While little critical attention has so far been paid to such emotions within an African communitarian framework, a wider philosophical literature examining the moral value of disruptive emotions could be drawn on to develop analyses of emotion within African communitarianism. In this paper, I explore how such an analysis could proceed. I argue that drawing on the wider emotion literature, and especially the concept of reactive attitudes introduced by P. F. Strawson, provides an initial case for even disruptive emotions to have value. Even so, we must question whether an analysis of emotion plausibly based on individualistic commitments is compatible with relational communitarian commitments. I nevertheless defend the compatibility and argue that, not only can disruptive emotions have instrumental value through their epistemic and motivational roles in the promotion of community but, importantly, they are partially constitutive of the interpersonal relationships within which we are embedded and that form community.