伪命题还是真问题?——关于中国语境中“理论之后”讨论的思考  

FalseProposition or Real Problem:Reflections on the Discussion of After theory in Chinese Context He Lei

作　　者：和磊[1] 

机构地区：[1]山东师范大学文学院

出　　处：《文化研究》2020年第3期193-206,共14页Cultural Studies

基　　金：国家社科基金项目“文化研究接受史研究”(批准号16BZW008)的阶段性成果。

摘　　要：伊格尔顿在《理论之后》中所讨论的核心问题是理论的效用或现实阐释力问题。但是,纵观这十几年国内学者关于“理论之后”或“后理论”的讨论,我们发现,这次的讨论似乎并没有真正把握到伊格尔顿《理论之后》的精髓:一是没有像伊格尔顿那样去反思在中国教授和传播的理论(包括中国的本土理论)阐释中国现实的能力;二是过多地去概括所谓“后理论”时代的普遍特征,这与伊格尔顿《理论之后》的关注点是相悖的;三是几乎没有对现实进行深入的探讨或反思,放弃了作为知识分子应有的现实关怀。The core issue discussed by Eagleton in After Theory is the utility of theory or the interpretation power of reality.However,the discussion in China does not really grasp the essence of After Theory.Firstly,it does not reflect on the interpretation power of theories(including Chinese native theories)in China.The second is to overgeneralize the general characteristics of the after theory era,which is contrary to Eagleton’s focus in After Theory.The third is that there is little in-depth discussion or reflection on reality,giving up the responsibility to care for reality that an intellectual should has.

关 键 词：伊格尔顿《理论之后》 阐释力 现实关怀 

分 类 号：G0[文化科学]