资格取消及其撤销

IF 0.2 4区 哲学 0 PHILOSOPHY DEUTSCHE ZEITSCHRIFT FUR PHILOSOPHIE Pub Date : 2022-04-01 DOI:10.1515/dzph-2022-0013
P. Deutscher
{"title":"资格取消及其撤销","authors":"P. Deutscher","doi":"10.1515/dzph-2022-0013","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract In this paper, the term “qualifying disqualification” is introduced to express an intersection of several different types of power that (in a Foucauldian terminology) are differentiated as disciplinary, sovereign, and biopolitical formations. The paper concurs with a viewpoint that has emerged in much post-Foucauldian scholarship that these should not be understood as replacing each other in a historically emerging, linear succession. The resulting question is how to interpret instances of their convergence and intersection – for example, are they best understood as mutually consolidating (as seen in some understandings of domination)? The paper points to the friction caused by a simultaneity of heterogeneous formations of power given that they are understood to “subjectivise” differently. In turn, different understandings and conducts of “capacity” and “qualification” correspond to those differences in addition to different techniques of inclusion, exclusion, and exception. “Qualifying disqualification” is proposed as a terminology to express this friction. The fields in which its implications are explored include critical race studies (particularly the work of Saidiya Hartman), “capacity”-based rights arguments, and new interpretations of power in the work of Foucault, particularly as theorised in his Collège de France lectures.","PeriodicalId":54099,"journal":{"name":"DEUTSCHE ZEITSCHRIFT FUR PHILOSOPHIE","volume":"70 1","pages":"195 - 225"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Qualifizierende Disqualifizierung und ihre Umkehrungen\",\"authors\":\"P. Deutscher\",\"doi\":\"10.1515/dzph-2022-0013\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract In this paper, the term “qualifying disqualification” is introduced to express an intersection of several different types of power that (in a Foucauldian terminology) are differentiated as disciplinary, sovereign, and biopolitical formations. The paper concurs with a viewpoint that has emerged in much post-Foucauldian scholarship that these should not be understood as replacing each other in a historically emerging, linear succession. The resulting question is how to interpret instances of their convergence and intersection – for example, are they best understood as mutually consolidating (as seen in some understandings of domination)? The paper points to the friction caused by a simultaneity of heterogeneous formations of power given that they are understood to “subjectivise” differently. In turn, different understandings and conducts of “capacity” and “qualification” correspond to those differences in addition to different techniques of inclusion, exclusion, and exception. “Qualifying disqualification” is proposed as a terminology to express this friction. The fields in which its implications are explored include critical race studies (particularly the work of Saidiya Hartman), “capacity”-based rights arguments, and new interpretations of power in the work of Foucault, particularly as theorised in his Collège de France lectures.\",\"PeriodicalId\":54099,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"DEUTSCHE ZEITSCHRIFT FUR PHILOSOPHIE\",\"volume\":\"70 1\",\"pages\":\"195 - 225\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"DEUTSCHE ZEITSCHRIFT FUR PHILOSOPHIE\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1515/dzph-2022-0013\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"PHILOSOPHY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"DEUTSCHE ZEITSCHRIFT FUR PHILOSOPHIE","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/dzph-2022-0013","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要在本文中,引入“资格取消资格”一词是为了表达几种不同类型的权力的交叉点,这些权力(用傅的术语)被区分为纪律、主权和生物政治形态。这篇论文赞同后傅学中出现的一种观点,即这些不应被理解为在历史上出现的线性序列中相互取代。由此产生的问题是,如何解释它们趋同和交叉的例子——例如,它们是否最好地被理解为相互巩固(正如一些对统治的理解所示)?本文指出了权力的异质性形成同时引起的摩擦,因为人们对权力的“主观化”理解不同。反过来,对“能力”和“资格”的不同理解和行为,除了包容、排斥和例外的不同技术之外,也对应着这些差异。“资格取消资格”被提议作为一个术语来表达这种摩擦。探索其含义的领域包括批判性种族研究(特别是赛迪娅·哈特曼的工作)、基于“能力”的权利论点,以及福柯工作中对权力的新解释,特别是在他的法兰西学院讲座中提出的理论。
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
Qualifizierende Disqualifizierung und ihre Umkehrungen
Abstract In this paper, the term “qualifying disqualification” is introduced to express an intersection of several different types of power that (in a Foucauldian terminology) are differentiated as disciplinary, sovereign, and biopolitical formations. The paper concurs with a viewpoint that has emerged in much post-Foucauldian scholarship that these should not be understood as replacing each other in a historically emerging, linear succession. The resulting question is how to interpret instances of their convergence and intersection – for example, are they best understood as mutually consolidating (as seen in some understandings of domination)? The paper points to the friction caused by a simultaneity of heterogeneous formations of power given that they are understood to “subjectivise” differently. In turn, different understandings and conducts of “capacity” and “qualification” correspond to those differences in addition to different techniques of inclusion, exclusion, and exception. “Qualifying disqualification” is proposed as a terminology to express this friction. The fields in which its implications are explored include critical race studies (particularly the work of Saidiya Hartman), “capacity”-based rights arguments, and new interpretations of power in the work of Foucault, particularly as theorised in his Collège de France lectures.
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
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
50.00%
发文量
42
期刊介绍: Als offenes Diskussionsforum fördert die Deutsche Zeitschrift für Philosophie den schulübergreifenden Dialog und die Kommunikation zwischen den philosophischen Kulturen. Vorrangig erscheinen Arbeiten, die aktiv in die moderne internationale philosophische Diskussion eingreifen und neue Denkansätze für sie liefern. Neben Fachaufsätzen und Essays, Interviews und Symposien publiziert die Zeitschrift Funde aus philosophischen Archiven, Diskussionen sowie Buchkritiken.
期刊最新文献
Selbstkritische Philosophiegeschichtsschreibung als Arbeit am Kanon Nochmals zu Mendelssohn, Kant und dem ontologischen Gottesbeweis Freiheit neu vorstellen: menschliches Handlungsvermögen in Zeiten der ökologischen Katastrophe Nachruf auf Dieter Henrich Darf die Ukraine kämpfen?
×
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