贫困批判:社会哲学的地下探索

Q2 Arts and Humanities Praktyka Teoretyczna Pub Date : 2021-12-15 DOI:10.14746/prt2021.4.6
Hélio Alexandre Silva
{"title":"贫困批判:社会哲学的地下探索","authors":"Hélio Alexandre Silva","doi":"10.14746/prt2021.4.6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Poverty is the primary focus of this paper; more particularly, the critique of poverty and not its mere description. It would not be an overstatement to say that one of the common grounds for poverty theories is that they describe the poor as those who systematically experience their lives in privation, namely around having the minimum when it comes to needs such as housing, food, health, education, free time, etc. There is, therefore, a theoretical and socially accepted orientation that promotes the sedimentation of a deep affinity between poverty and the minimum. Based on this reasoning, what is set on the horizon is a kind of non-explicit acceptance that the overcoming of poverty can be achieved by granting the poor something beyond the minimum, however elementary that “something extra” may be. Thus, if the experience of poverty involves some sort of lack or privation, and if this condition can be fully filled by something that has already been socially produced, then what would justify the fact that some people are able to fully fill it while others (the poor) can only secure the bare minimum? In light of this, perhaps it would be better not to question the acceptable “minimum” but, rather, to ask: Why would the notion of poverty be guided by this normative criterion? Therefore, a way of describing my broader hypothesis on poverty would be to understand that it should be measured based on the level of denial of access to what has been socially produced. The further one is from accessing social wealth, the poorer one is. Finally, this tendency toward assimilation between poverty and the minimum engenders a depressive effect on demands for social change.","PeriodicalId":36093,"journal":{"name":"Praktyka Teoretyczna","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Critique of Poverty: Exploring the Underground of Social Philosophy\",\"authors\":\"Hélio Alexandre Silva\",\"doi\":\"10.14746/prt2021.4.6\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Poverty is the primary focus of this paper; more particularly, the critique of poverty and not its mere description. It would not be an overstatement to say that one of the common grounds for poverty theories is that they describe the poor as those who systematically experience their lives in privation, namely around having the minimum when it comes to needs such as housing, food, health, education, free time, etc. There is, therefore, a theoretical and socially accepted orientation that promotes the sedimentation of a deep affinity between poverty and the minimum. Based on this reasoning, what is set on the horizon is a kind of non-explicit acceptance that the overcoming of poverty can be achieved by granting the poor something beyond the minimum, however elementary that “something extra” may be. Thus, if the experience of poverty involves some sort of lack or privation, and if this condition can be fully filled by something that has already been socially produced, then what would justify the fact that some people are able to fully fill it while others (the poor) can only secure the bare minimum? In light of this, perhaps it would be better not to question the acceptable “minimum” but, rather, to ask: Why would the notion of poverty be guided by this normative criterion? Therefore, a way of describing my broader hypothesis on poverty would be to understand that it should be measured based on the level of denial of access to what has been socially produced. The further one is from accessing social wealth, the poorer one is. Finally, this tendency toward assimilation between poverty and the minimum engenders a depressive effect on demands for social change.\",\"PeriodicalId\":36093,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Praktyka Teoretyczna\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-12-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Praktyka Teoretyczna\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.14746/prt2021.4.6\",\"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":"Praktyka Teoretyczna","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14746/prt2021.4.6","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: 0

摘要

贫困是本文的主要关注点;更特别的是,对贫困的批判,而不仅仅是对贫困的描述。可以毫不夸张地说,贫困理论的共同点之一是,他们将穷人描述为那些系统地经历贫困生活的人,即在住房、食物、健康、教育、空闲时间等需求方面拥有最低限度的生活,一种理论上和社会公认的取向,促进贫困和最低限度之间的深厚亲和力的沉淀。基于这一推理,即将到来的是一种非明确的接受,即通过给予穷人超出最低限度的东西,无论“额外的东西”多么初级,都可以实现克服贫困。因此,如果贫困经历涉及某种缺乏或贫困,如果这种情况可以完全由社会已经产生的东西来填补,那么有什么可以证明这样一个事实:一些人能够完全填补,而另一些人(穷人)只能获得最低限度的保障?有鉴于此,也许最好不要质疑可接受的“最低限度”,而是要问:为什么贫困的概念要以这一规范性标准为指导?因此,描述我关于贫困的更广泛假设的一种方式是理解,应该根据拒绝获得社会生产的东西的程度来衡量贫困。越远离社会财富,越贫穷。最后,这种贫困和最低收入之间的同化趋势对社会变革的需求产生了抑制作用。
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
A Critique of Poverty: Exploring the Underground of Social Philosophy
Poverty is the primary focus of this paper; more particularly, the critique of poverty and not its mere description. It would not be an overstatement to say that one of the common grounds for poverty theories is that they describe the poor as those who systematically experience their lives in privation, namely around having the minimum when it comes to needs such as housing, food, health, education, free time, etc. There is, therefore, a theoretical and socially accepted orientation that promotes the sedimentation of a deep affinity between poverty and the minimum. Based on this reasoning, what is set on the horizon is a kind of non-explicit acceptance that the overcoming of poverty can be achieved by granting the poor something beyond the minimum, however elementary that “something extra” may be. Thus, if the experience of poverty involves some sort of lack or privation, and if this condition can be fully filled by something that has already been socially produced, then what would justify the fact that some people are able to fully fill it while others (the poor) can only secure the bare minimum? In light of this, perhaps it would be better not to question the acceptable “minimum” but, rather, to ask: Why would the notion of poverty be guided by this normative criterion? Therefore, a way of describing my broader hypothesis on poverty would be to understand that it should be measured based on the level of denial of access to what has been socially produced. The further one is from accessing social wealth, the poorer one is. Finally, this tendency toward assimilation between poverty and the minimum engenders a depressive effect on demands for social change.
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
Praktyka Teoretyczna
Praktyka Teoretyczna Arts and Humanities-Literature and Literary Theory
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
24
审稿时长
20 weeks
期刊最新文献
„Na hałdach rosną ludzie”: literacka historia pogórniczych środowisk sprzymierzeńczych The Doomsday Economy: Colonial Violence, Environmental Catastrophe, and Burning Tires in Palestine Dialektyka natury i społeczeństwa przeciwko monizmowi. Esej recenzyjny z „Marx in the Anthropocene” Kohei Saita (2023, Cambridge University Press) Francuski atom a kapitał symboliczny Bourdieu Rewolucyjne siły reprodukcji? Esej recenzyjny wokół książki Stefanii Barci, „Forces of Reproduction: Notes for a Counter-Hegemonic Anthropocene” (2020, Cambridge University Press)
×
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