地球边界、社会边界和集体自我限制:超越后马克思主义的舒适区

IF 3.6 Q2 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES Sustainability: Science, Practice, and Policy Pub Date : 2022-08-01 DOI:10.1080/15487733.2022.2099124
Ingolfur Blühdorn
{"title":"地球边界、社会边界和集体自我限制:超越后马克思主义的舒适区","authors":"Ingolfur Blühdorn","doi":"10.1080/15487733.2022.2099124","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Issues of boundaries, limits, and restriction have shifted, once again, into the center of eco-political debates. An article recently published in this journal by Ulrich Brand and colleagues made the case that supposedly objective planetary boundaries, as specified by Earth-system scientists, always remain contingent on social norms. Hence, the debate on planetary boundaries needs to be supplemented, they argue, by a debate on societal boundaries. Addressing the critical social sciences, in particular, they seek to open a dialogue on collectively defined self-limitation, which they regard as a promising means for setting such boundaries. This article aims to contribute to, and help shape, this dialogue. Taking the intervention by Brand and his co-authors as a prompt, and focusing on so-called advanced modern societies in the Global North, this article flags up important parameters that condition the success or failure of any attempt at collective self-limitation. Calling to mind the dual commitment of eco-critical social science not only to transforming contemporary society but, no less importantly, to providing a nuanced diagnosis and analysis of its present condition, the article calls on critical social science to move beyond the established claims, hopes, and beliefs of post-Marxist analysis, conceptualized here as the post-Marxist comfort zone. In particular, the article draws attention to the dilemma that the logic and dynamic of emancipation, which (eco-)critical social theorists and sociologists commonly present as the centerpiece of their transformative agenda, can itself negatively impact the prospects for collective self-limitation.","PeriodicalId":35192,"journal":{"name":"Sustainability: Science, Practice, and Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Planetary boundaries, societal boundaries, and collective self-limitation: moving beyond the post-Marxist comfort zone\",\"authors\":\"Ingolfur Blühdorn\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/15487733.2022.2099124\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Issues of boundaries, limits, and restriction have shifted, once again, into the center of eco-political debates. An article recently published in this journal by Ulrich Brand and colleagues made the case that supposedly objective planetary boundaries, as specified by Earth-system scientists, always remain contingent on social norms. Hence, the debate on planetary boundaries needs to be supplemented, they argue, by a debate on societal boundaries. Addressing the critical social sciences, in particular, they seek to open a dialogue on collectively defined self-limitation, which they regard as a promising means for setting such boundaries. This article aims to contribute to, and help shape, this dialogue. Taking the intervention by Brand and his co-authors as a prompt, and focusing on so-called advanced modern societies in the Global North, this article flags up important parameters that condition the success or failure of any attempt at collective self-limitation. Calling to mind the dual commitment of eco-critical social science not only to transforming contemporary society but, no less importantly, to providing a nuanced diagnosis and analysis of its present condition, the article calls on critical social science to move beyond the established claims, hopes, and beliefs of post-Marxist analysis, conceptualized here as the post-Marxist comfort zone. In particular, the article draws attention to the dilemma that the logic and dynamic of emancipation, which (eco-)critical social theorists and sociologists commonly present as the centerpiece of their transformative agenda, can itself negatively impact the prospects for collective self-limitation.\",\"PeriodicalId\":35192,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Sustainability: Science, Practice, and Policy\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Sustainability: Science, Practice, and Policy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/15487733.2022.2099124\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sustainability: Science, Practice, and Policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15487733.2022.2099124","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

边界、限制和限制的抽象问题再次转移到生态政治辩论的中心。乌尔里希·布兰德(Ulrich Brand)及其同事最近在该杂志上发表的一篇文章指出,地球系统科学家所规定的所谓客观的行星边界,总是取决于社会规范。因此,他们认为,关于地球边界的辩论需要通过关于社会边界的辩论来补充。特别是针对关键的社会科学,他们寻求就集体定义的自我限制展开对话,他们认为这是设定这种界限的有希望的手段。本文旨在促进并帮助形成这种对话。以布兰德和他的合著者的干预为提示,并将重点放在全球北方所谓的先进现代社会上,本文指出了决定任何集体自我限制尝试成功或失败的重要参数。让人想起生态批判社会科学的双重承诺,不仅要改变当代社会,而且同样重要的是,要提供对其现状的细致诊断和分析,文章呼吁批判社会科学超越后马克思主义分析的既定主张、希望和信念,在这里被概念为后马克思主义舒适区。特别是,这篇文章引起了人们对解放的逻辑和动力的关注,这是(生态)批判社会理论家和社会学家通常作为其变革议程的核心提出的,它本身就会对集体自我限制的前景产生负面影响。
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
Planetary boundaries, societal boundaries, and collective self-limitation: moving beyond the post-Marxist comfort zone
Abstract Issues of boundaries, limits, and restriction have shifted, once again, into the center of eco-political debates. An article recently published in this journal by Ulrich Brand and colleagues made the case that supposedly objective planetary boundaries, as specified by Earth-system scientists, always remain contingent on social norms. Hence, the debate on planetary boundaries needs to be supplemented, they argue, by a debate on societal boundaries. Addressing the critical social sciences, in particular, they seek to open a dialogue on collectively defined self-limitation, which they regard as a promising means for setting such boundaries. This article aims to contribute to, and help shape, this dialogue. Taking the intervention by Brand and his co-authors as a prompt, and focusing on so-called advanced modern societies in the Global North, this article flags up important parameters that condition the success or failure of any attempt at collective self-limitation. Calling to mind the dual commitment of eco-critical social science not only to transforming contemporary society but, no less importantly, to providing a nuanced diagnosis and analysis of its present condition, the article calls on critical social science to move beyond the established claims, hopes, and beliefs of post-Marxist analysis, conceptualized here as the post-Marxist comfort zone. In particular, the article draws attention to the dilemma that the logic and dynamic of emancipation, which (eco-)critical social theorists and sociologists commonly present as the centerpiece of their transformative agenda, can itself negatively impact the prospects for collective self-limitation.
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
Sustainability: Science, Practice, and Policy
Sustainability: Science, Practice, and Policy Social Sciences-Geography, Planning and Development
CiteScore
12.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
54
审稿时长
27 weeks
期刊介绍: Sustainability: Science, Practice and Policy is a refereed, open-access journal which recognizes that climate change and other socio-environmental challenges require significant transformation of existing systems of consumption and production. Complex and diverse arrays of societal factors and institutions will in coming decades need to reconfigure agro-food systems, implement renewable energy sources, and reinvent housing, modes of mobility, and lifestyles for the current century and beyond. These innovations will need to be formulated in ways that enhance global equity, reduce unequal access to resources, and enable all people on the planet to lead flourishing lives within biophysical constraints. The journal seeks to advance scientific and political perspectives and to cultivate transdisciplinary discussions involving researchers, policy makers, civic entrepreneurs, and others. The ultimate objective is to encourage the design and deployment of both local experiments and system innovations that contribute to a more sustainable future by empowering individuals and organizations and facilitating processes of social learning.
期刊最新文献
The role of interest in the unsustainability of growth: analytical findings using an accounting model Deliberating just transition: lessons from a citizens’ jury on carbon-neutral transport Driving sustainable transportation: insights and strategies for shared-rides services Sustainable fashion: to define, or not to define, that is not the question Accelerating transition toward district heating-system decarbonization by policy co-design with key investors: opportunities and challenges
×
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