从下而来的宽容:主权主体的不安

IF 0.2 4区 社会学 Q4 CULTURAL STUDIES Boundary 2-An International Journal of Literature and Culture Pub Date : 2022-05-01 DOI:10.1215/01903659-9644590
D. Simpson
{"title":"从下而来的宽容:主权主体的不安","authors":"D. Simpson","doi":"10.1215/01903659-9644590","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n This essay takes issue with the common assumption, ably represented by Herbert Marcuse and Wendy Brown, that tolerance belongs only to the powerful and is deployed to prevent access to political redress on the part of vulnerable groups or persons. But tolerance can also be understood as an unstable concept that does not finally support a sustainable sovereignty among those claiming a position to extend it. Engaging with the work of Wendy Brown, Rainer Forst, and others, a case is made for adding an “endurance conception” of tolerance that restores the early sense of the term as specifying a capacity to bear degrees of pain and suffering. Examples from William Wordsworth and Adam Smith, and from contemporary South Africa and the United States, suggest that such an expanded conception can lead us to imagine political agency as thinkable for persons more usually described as passive and subordinate.","PeriodicalId":46332,"journal":{"name":"Boundary 2-An International Journal of Literature and Culture","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Tolerance from Below: Unsettling the Sovereign Subject\",\"authors\":\"D. Simpson\",\"doi\":\"10.1215/01903659-9644590\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n This essay takes issue with the common assumption, ably represented by Herbert Marcuse and Wendy Brown, that tolerance belongs only to the powerful and is deployed to prevent access to political redress on the part of vulnerable groups or persons. But tolerance can also be understood as an unstable concept that does not finally support a sustainable sovereignty among those claiming a position to extend it. Engaging with the work of Wendy Brown, Rainer Forst, and others, a case is made for adding an “endurance conception” of tolerance that restores the early sense of the term as specifying a capacity to bear degrees of pain and suffering. Examples from William Wordsworth and Adam Smith, and from contemporary South Africa and the United States, suggest that such an expanded conception can lead us to imagine political agency as thinkable for persons more usually described as passive and subordinate.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46332,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Boundary 2-An International Journal of Literature and Culture\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Boundary 2-An International Journal of Literature and Culture\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1215/01903659-9644590\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"CULTURAL STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Boundary 2-An International Journal of Literature and Culture","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1215/01903659-9644590","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"CULTURAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

这篇文章对赫伯特·马库斯和温迪·布朗有力地代表的共同假设提出了质疑,即宽容只属于权贵,是为了防止弱势群体或个人获得政治补救。但宽容也可以被理解为一个不稳定的概念,它并不能最终支持那些声称有权延长主权的人的可持续主权,有理由增加一个“耐力概念”,即宽容,恢复了该术语的早期含义,即指定承受一定程度痛苦的能力。威廉·华兹华斯(William Wordsworth)和亚当·斯密(Adam Smith),以及当代南非和美国的例子表明,这种扩展的概念可以让我们将政治代理想象成对那些通常被描述为被动和从属的人来说是可以想象的。
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
Tolerance from Below: Unsettling the Sovereign Subject
This essay takes issue with the common assumption, ably represented by Herbert Marcuse and Wendy Brown, that tolerance belongs only to the powerful and is deployed to prevent access to political redress on the part of vulnerable groups or persons. But tolerance can also be understood as an unstable concept that does not finally support a sustainable sovereignty among those claiming a position to extend it. Engaging with the work of Wendy Brown, Rainer Forst, and others, a case is made for adding an “endurance conception” of tolerance that restores the early sense of the term as specifying a capacity to bear degrees of pain and suffering. Examples from William Wordsworth and Adam Smith, and from contemporary South Africa and the United States, suggest that such an expanded conception can lead us to imagine political agency as thinkable for persons more usually described as passive and subordinate.
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
0.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
24
期刊介绍: Extending beyond the postmodern, boundary 2, an international journal of literature and culture, approaches problems in these areas from a number of politically, historically, and theoretically informed perspectives. boundary 2 remains committed to understanding the present and approaching the study of national and international culture and politics through literature and the human sciences.
期刊最新文献
Spoiled History: Leprosy and the Lessons of Queer Medieval Historiography A Bridge Too Far? Ludovico Marracci's Translation of the Qurʾan and the Persistence of Medieval Biblicism Race, Medieval Studies, and Disciplinary Boundaries Belle da Costa Greene and the Undoing of “Medieval” Studies Making Islam (Coherent): Academic Discourse and the Politics of Language
×
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