《冷漠时代的批判

IF 1.4 4区 计算机科学 Q4 AUTOMATION & CONTROL SYSTEMS Discrete Event Dynamic Systems-Theory and Applications Pub Date : 2022-01-13 DOI:10.1353/tae.2022.0003
Iain M. Mackenzie
{"title":"《冷漠时代的批判","authors":"Iain M. Mackenzie","doi":"10.1353/tae.2022.0003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract:In After Finitude, Meillassoux asks an epoch-defining question: how can we criticize both ideological dogmatism and skeptical fanaticism if the rise of skeptical fanaticism is an effect of the Kantian critical philosophy one must employ against ideological dogmatism? Meillassoux's answer is to argue in favor of thought's ability to access the absolute necessity of contingency. Agamben and Laruelle give an alternative answer. Although very different in style and argument, both aim to disqualify fanatical positions by showing how \"the belief that belief is all there is\" is not all there is because of the contingent nature of thought about the real. I will argue that while pursuing logics of disqualification, all three thinkers nonetheless employ arguments that render positive claims that sit uncomfortably within their respective systems. The upshot is that the transcendental gesture of critical philosophy—what are the conditions of our positive claims about thought and the world—is halted by an uncritical appeal to the condition of all conditions; intellectual intuition in Meillassoux and an indifferent thought/real in Agamben and Laruelle. But what options remain, given that the problem of critique in an age of indifference is a problem that critical philosophy itself has created? The task, I will argue, is to express the transcendental conditions of what we know about the world and how we know what we know about the world in a manner that retains the contingency of both. But are there variants of contemporary thought that can express the contingency of the real and of thought while remaining within the transcendental apparatus providing the necessary criteria for the challenge of both ideological dogmatism and skeptical fanaticism? I shall bring the argument to a close by suggesting that two such variants are available—transcendental naturalism and transcendental aestheticism—and that the latter provides a secure but non-dogmatic ground for critique in an age of indifference.","PeriodicalId":55174,"journal":{"name":"Discrete Event Dynamic Systems-Theory and Applications","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Critique in the Age of Indifference\",\"authors\":\"Iain M. Mackenzie\",\"doi\":\"10.1353/tae.2022.0003\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract:In After Finitude, Meillassoux asks an epoch-defining question: how can we criticize both ideological dogmatism and skeptical fanaticism if the rise of skeptical fanaticism is an effect of the Kantian critical philosophy one must employ against ideological dogmatism? Meillassoux's answer is to argue in favor of thought's ability to access the absolute necessity of contingency. Agamben and Laruelle give an alternative answer. Although very different in style and argument, both aim to disqualify fanatical positions by showing how \\\"the belief that belief is all there is\\\" is not all there is because of the contingent nature of thought about the real. I will argue that while pursuing logics of disqualification, all three thinkers nonetheless employ arguments that render positive claims that sit uncomfortably within their respective systems. The upshot is that the transcendental gesture of critical philosophy—what are the conditions of our positive claims about thought and the world—is halted by an uncritical appeal to the condition of all conditions; intellectual intuition in Meillassoux and an indifferent thought/real in Agamben and Laruelle. But what options remain, given that the problem of critique in an age of indifference is a problem that critical philosophy itself has created? The task, I will argue, is to express the transcendental conditions of what we know about the world and how we know what we know about the world in a manner that retains the contingency of both. But are there variants of contemporary thought that can express the contingency of the real and of thought while remaining within the transcendental apparatus providing the necessary criteria for the challenge of both ideological dogmatism and skeptical fanaticism? I shall bring the argument to a close by suggesting that two such variants are available—transcendental naturalism and transcendental aestheticism—and that the latter provides a secure but non-dogmatic ground for critique in an age of indifference.\",\"PeriodicalId\":55174,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Discrete Event Dynamic Systems-Theory and Applications\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Discrete Event Dynamic Systems-Theory and Applications\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"94\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1353/tae.2022.0003\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"计算机科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"AUTOMATION & CONTROL SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Discrete Event Dynamic Systems-Theory and Applications","FirstCategoryId":"94","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/tae.2022.0003","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"计算机科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"AUTOMATION & CONTROL SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要:在《有限性之后》一书中,梅拉苏提出了一个划时代的问题:如果怀疑狂热主义的兴起是康德批判哲学对意识形态教条主义的一种影响,那么我们如何能够同时批判意识形态教条主义和怀疑狂热主义?Meillassoux的答案是支持思维的能力,以接近偶然性的绝对必要性。Agamben和Laruelle给出了另一种答案。尽管在风格和论点上非常不同,但两者的目的都是通过展示“信仰就是一切”并不是一切,因为对现实的思考具有偶然的性质,从而取消狂热的立场。我认为,在追求取消资格逻辑的同时,这三位思想家都采用了在各自体系中令人不安地提出积极主张的论点。其结果是,批判哲学的先验姿态——即我们关于思想和世界的积极主张的条件——由于不加批判地求助于一切条件的条件而停止了;梅亚苏的知性直觉和阿甘本和拉鲁埃尔的冷漠思想/真实。但是,考虑到冷漠时代的批判问题是批判哲学本身造成的问题,还有什么选择呢?我认为,我们的任务是表达我们对世界的认识以及我们如何认识我们对世界的认识的先验条件同时保留两者的偶然性。但是,当代思想是否存在各种变体,既能表达现实和思想的偶然性,又能保持在先验机器内,为挑战意识形态教条主义和怀疑狂热主义提供必要的标准?我将通过提出两种这样的变体——先验自然主义和先验唯美主义——来结束争论,后者为冷漠时代的批判提供了一个安全但非教条的基础。
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
Critique in the Age of Indifference
Abstract:In After Finitude, Meillassoux asks an epoch-defining question: how can we criticize both ideological dogmatism and skeptical fanaticism if the rise of skeptical fanaticism is an effect of the Kantian critical philosophy one must employ against ideological dogmatism? Meillassoux's answer is to argue in favor of thought's ability to access the absolute necessity of contingency. Agamben and Laruelle give an alternative answer. Although very different in style and argument, both aim to disqualify fanatical positions by showing how "the belief that belief is all there is" is not all there is because of the contingent nature of thought about the real. I will argue that while pursuing logics of disqualification, all three thinkers nonetheless employ arguments that render positive claims that sit uncomfortably within their respective systems. The upshot is that the transcendental gesture of critical philosophy—what are the conditions of our positive claims about thought and the world—is halted by an uncritical appeal to the condition of all conditions; intellectual intuition in Meillassoux and an indifferent thought/real in Agamben and Laruelle. But what options remain, given that the problem of critique in an age of indifference is a problem that critical philosophy itself has created? The task, I will argue, is to express the transcendental conditions of what we know about the world and how we know what we know about the world in a manner that retains the contingency of both. But are there variants of contemporary thought that can express the contingency of the real and of thought while remaining within the transcendental apparatus providing the necessary criteria for the challenge of both ideological dogmatism and skeptical fanaticism? I shall bring the argument to a close by suggesting that two such variants are available—transcendental naturalism and transcendental aestheticism—and that the latter provides a secure but non-dogmatic ground for critique in an age of indifference.
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
3.90
自引率
5.00%
发文量
13
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The research on discrete event dynamic systems (DEDSs) is multi-disciplinary in nature and its development has been dynamic. Examples of DEDSs include manufacturing plants, communication networks, computer systems, management information databases, logistics systems, command-control-communication systems, robotics, and other man-made operational systems. The state processes of such systems cannot be described by differential equations in general. The aim of this journal, Discrete Event Dynamic Systems: Theory and Applications, is to publish high-quality, peer-reviewed papers on the modeling and control of, and all other aspects related to, DEDSs. In particular, the journal publishes papers dealing with general theories and methodologies of DEDSs and their applications to any particular subject, including hybrid systems, as well as papers discussing practical problems from which some generally applicable DEDS theories or methodologies can be formulated; The scope of this journal is defined by its emphasis on discrete events and the dynamic nature of the systems and on their modeling, control and optimization.
期刊最新文献
Critique of Critique of Critique: Review of Roy Ben-Shai’s Critique of Critique The Supply Chain Beneficiary: Review of Benjamin McKean’s Dis-orienting Neoliberalism Radical Democratic Citizen-Subjectivity: Scouting and Storytelling in Our Time On the Ownership of the Means of Training: Domination, Asceticism, and Capacities of Resistance A Handbook for Anticolonial Research
×
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