美国著名哲学家理查德·罗蒂去世

美国著名的实用主义哲学家理查德·罗蒂（1931—2007）于2007年6月8日因病逝世。罗蒂的思想涉及哲学、政治、文学理论以及文化等各个方面。在哲学上，罗蒂批判了传统的符合论的知识观，并把知识与哲学重新定义为一种社会与文化的实践与对话。     

纪念五四运动90周年研讨会综述

今年是五四运动90周年。由教育部《高校理论战线》杂志主办的“纪念五四运动90周年”研讨会日前在京召开。来自北京大学、北京师范大学、中国社会科学院等单位的专家学者就五四运动的历史地位和作用、五四时期的民主与科学、五四精神与爱国主义、知识分子的成长道路等问题展开了深入研讨。     

罗蒂来访——哈贝马斯和利奥塔论后现代性

在《知识与人类旨趣》(Knowledge and Human Interests)中,哈贝马斯试图把马克思和弗洛伊德已经完成了的理论普遍化——通过把他们的“揭露”(unmasking)方案置于一种更为全面的理论中。近些年来,哈贝马斯经常批评的一种当代法国思想,却是从怀疑马克思和弗洛伊德、怀疑怀疑者、怀疑“揭露”开始的。例如,利奥塔(Lyotard)说,他将     

知识分子和权力法国哲学家M.福柯和G.德勒泽的一次对话

福柯一位毛主义者曾对我说:“我很容易理解萨特支持我们的意图,我了解他的政治目标和政治活动,我也部分地理解你的立场,因为你经常关心限制的问题。但德勒泽却是个谜。”听到这些话,我吃了一惊,因为你的立场我似乎向来是非常清楚的。     

萨特的遭遇——德国哲学家J.哈贝马斯与U.桑塔马利亚和R.沃林的座谈

问:萨特的哲学在您的思想发展中是否起过某种作用? 哈贝马斯:正是在第二次世界大战后的年代里,我接触到萨特的著作,首先是他的戏剧。当时我是中学会考(1949年)前的中学生。特别是在杜塞尔多夫,我看过仑根和弗利肯希尔特主演的《苍蝇》。这出戏在德国大概还引出了深刻的形而上学的解释。但是其他的戏剧,例如《禁止旁听》,就已经能使我们看出萨特是一位政治人物。那时萨特是很时髦的,他的思想,还有这些思想的夸张的词藻到处被人接受。将近1950年,那时我是个年轻的大学生,我了解了萨特的哲学著作,与此同时我阅读了西蒙·鲍伏瓦的《第二性》,这本书在大学的一定范围内引起了热烈的讨论。阅读《存在与虚无》,对于我理解《存在与时间》     

社会实践与知识分子教育和改造——以建国初期知识分子参加土地改革为例

新中国成立后,中共极为重视知识分子的教育和改造,除组织知识分子进行政治理论学习外,中共还在组织知识分子参与社会实践这一层面进行了探索,比如,中共在建国初期号召知识分子参加新解放区的土地改革运动。本文将回顾这一运动的发展过程,并评价其历史成效。本文认为,中共教育和改造知识分子,其核心在于要改变知识分子脱离实际、脱离工农的习气。现在,我们仍然需要发挥社会实践在知识分子思想政治教育中的重要作用。当然,我们对于知识分子参加社会实践应该把握好尺度,避免出现极端化。     

作为21世纪一门综合性跨学科的国公共哲学观念

一、引言 “公共哲学”这个术语似乎是在20世纪,特别是在讲英语的世界开始使用.[1]然而,假如我们把公共哲学这个概念定义为“从哲学上探讨诸如政治合法性、社会正义、战争与和平、环境问题、公共记忆等各种各样的公共问题的哲学”,那么,可以在西方国家及东亚国家的经典作品中找到与此相当的概念.确实,一种悠久的传统可以追溯到2000多年以前.     

宗教对话和公共空间

本文拟从已有的宗教对话理论出发,针对宗教对话背后的真理观念和对话标准进行反思,指出宗教对话面临的理论困境及其实践品质。在此基础上,作者尝试指出:宗教对话应该走出"范式"的迷思,打破对"身份"的执着,以实践为导向,坚持开放的对话理性,并在对话中相互学习、相互转化。为此,宗教对话需要进入公共空间,并与公共宗教/神学的建设结合起来,真正转化为信众或公众实践生活的灵性或道德资源。     

政治自由主义和公共理性的局限性

这篇论文分析了政治自由主义的局限性.这一点是通过批判其公共理性的不足来阐明的.这个论述分三部分来进行:第一部分分析公共理性和话语,第二、三部分分别进行民主缺陷和社会缺陷的解释.这些缺陷被分析为是对公民参与政治社会条件的一个根本限制.因此这个分析集中于过去十年最有影响的政治哲学家 J.罗尔斯的公共理性理论.这篇论文认为在他的理论中有两个缺陷:一是随着个体向社会的不完全整合而带来的缺陷--民主缺陷;二是与低估正义的社会分配维度相关的缺陷--社会缺陷.     

从新公共管理到新公共服务的理论逻辑和实践

新公共管理理论是自20世纪70年代末以来深刻影响西方政府改革的重要理论,新公共服务理论试图在承认新公共管理理论对于改进当代公共管理实践所具有的重要价值并摒弃其固有缺陷的基础上,建立一种更加关注民主价值和公共利益、更加适合于现代公民社会发展和公共管理实践需要的新的理论选择。     

Richard Rorty and the concept of redemption

It is curious why a secular pragmatist like Richard Rorty would capitalize on the religiously-laden concept of redemption in his recent writings. But more than being an intriguing idea in his later work, this essay argues that redemption plays a key role in the historical development of Rorty’s thought. It begins by exploring the paradoxical status of redemption in Rorty’s oeuvre. It then investigates an overlooked debate between Rorty, Dreyfus and Taylor (1980) that first endorses the concept. It then contrasts Rorty’s notions of essentialism and edification to link redemption to self-transformation. After providing a historical legitimation to the idea of redemption, the essay reconstructs Rorty’s modern version of the concept. Redemption for Rorty centers on human relationships and not religion or philosophy; it is also pluralist and liberal in character. Finally, it concludes that Rorty uses redemption—a primary component of religious language—to capture the salvific force of religion. This power is redirected toward the protection of secular, democratic hopes, which are demanding and fragile by nature.     

Richard Rorty and the Righteous Among the Nations

Richard Rorty has proposed the hypothesis that those who came to the rescue of Jews in Nazi Europe are more likely to have been moved to help by parochialist sorts of consideration — sympathy for a colleague, fellow national, and the like — than they are by universalist motives having to do with the proper treatment of human beings. Although inconclusive on many other points, the research on rescuer behaviour during the Holocaust embodies a consensus contrary to Rorty's hypothesis; and extensive reference to the rescuers'own testimony supports that consensus .     

Patriotism and Pride beyond Richard Rorty and Martha Nussbaum

Old and new complicities of collective political attachment in violence give patriotism a bad name. Simplistic positions often view collective attachment as either entirely bad or as sanitizable merely by adding to patriotism the adjective ‘critical’. Patriotic affectivity, as illustrated with the political emotion of pride, stands out within philosophical debates. This article argues that, to think about patriotism differently, we need to look more closely at ‘optics’ of patriotism and pride that have escaped debate although they are crucial for avoiding older pitfalls. To this end, I revisit Richard Rorty’s and Martha Nussbaum’s positions on pride by introducing more challenging examples of what being/feeling patriotic should mean. I reframe patriotism so that an ‘outward’ ‘optic’ acts as a strong corrective of the usual inward preoccupation with domestic issues within the polity and the state.     

Richard Rorty and the pragmatic turn in the study of religion

Recent interest in the pragmatic tradition draws much of its impetus from the work of Richard Rorty and his critics. This paper argues that Rorty's late interest in religion derives from his abiding interests in American liberalism and not specifically from his Pragmatism. Students of religion, however, have much to learn from the pragmatic tradition and over the last 25 years work by Wayne Proudfoot, Jeffrey Stout, and others has been important in establishing a pluralist approach to the study of religion that avoids the pitfalls of foundationalism, essentialism, and dogmatism in understanding religion and religious phenomena. The continued pursuit of this approach, the essay concludes, will help students of religion avoid unnecessary worries about theories and methods.     

Ethics of Ambiguity and Irony: Jacques Derrida and Richard Rorty

This paper examines the relation or, more precisely, tension between postmodern deconstruction and ethics by elaborating upon the ethico-political dimensions of deconstructionism. It embarks on a critical assessment of postmodern discourse on ethics in view of its political implications by analyzing Jacques Derrida's and Richard Rorty's arguments with an assumption that their positions represent a certain logic in the postmodern discourse on ethics. Postmodern ethics is based on incredulity with regard to traditional metanarratives, and it defines ethics in terms of sensitivity or responsibility to otherness and difference. Its proponents believe that the negation of modern metanarratives opens a way to the Other which has been marginalized and suppressed both in thought and in social practice. Derrida and Rorty represent this position with their emphasis on the ethical nature of deconstruction and the need to elaborate new languages for ethics. Despite postmodern appeal to ethics of this sort, however, postmodern thinking shows its limits in dealing with most ethical-political matters in the contemporary world. The postmodern approach to ethics, being restricted within the perspective of the individual, does not provide any determinate framework for deciding how to adjudicate conflicting ethical claims or how to link the unconditional affirmation of emancipatory ideals, enlightened social criticism, and democratic accountability in determinate political terms. In the main, this paper contends that philosophical deconstruction and responsibility to otherness undermine each other in the public sphere.