承认的“矛盾”:巴特勒等人对霍耐特物化重构的批判  

“Ambivalence”of Recognition:Critiques of Honneth’s Reconstruction of Reification by Butler,Geuss and Lear

作　　者：洪楼 HONG Lou(School of Marxism,Xiamen University,Xiamen Fujian 361005,China)

机构地区：[1]厦门大学马克思主义学院,福建厦门361005

出　　处：《学习与探索》2021年第11期8-17,190,共11页Study & Exploration

基　　金：国家社会科学基金一般项目“全球治理视域下的国外马克思主义的当代资本主义批判研究”(20BKS162)。

摘　　要：巴特勒、戈伊斯与李尔最早对霍耐特的物化理论提出了批判性评论。他们的批评指向了同一个方向,即霍耐特的物化批判理论依赖一种过于乐观的哲学人类学,把太多的主体间的同情注入到最初的人类情境中,从而未能成功地处理具有存在论意义的先在承认与具体的规范性承认之间的张力。霍耐特在回应中进一步澄清,作为人类交往之必要前提的先在承认并不蕴含与他人交往的规范性含义或积极态度。作为物化批判之基础的先在承认概念,是霍耐特对承认的含义进行拓展的一次试验性尝试,尽管并不成功,但这一重构一方面由于其高度原创性的诠释以及跨学科研究的视角,成为在当代社会哲学语境中复兴物化概念的一次有益尝试;另一方面,它从反面促使霍耐特重新肯定先在承认的规范性含义,从而构成了其承认理论发展的一个重要阶段。Butler,Geuss and Lear made the earliest critical comments on Honneth’s theory of reification,who all held the same point of view that Honneth’s critical theory of reification relied on an overly optimistic philosophical anthropology that injected too much intersubjective sympathy into the initial human situation,thus failing to successfully deal with the tension between the antecedent recognition of ontological significance and the specific normative recognitions.In his rejoinder,Honneth further clarified that antecedent recognition as a necessary prerequisite for human interaction did not imply a normative meaning or a positive attitude to interact with others.The concept of antecedent recognition,as the basis of criticism of reification,was an experimental trial by Honneth to expand the meaning of recognition.Although it was unsuccessful,this reconstruction,on the one hand,due to its highly original interpretation and interdisciplinary research perspective,had become a useful attempt to revive the concept of reification in the context of contemporary social philosophy;on the other hand,it in turn urged Honneth to reaffirm the normative meaning of antecedent recognition,thus constituting an important stage of the development of his recognition theory.

关 键 词：承认 霍耐特 巴特勒 戈伊斯 李尔 物化 先在承认 规范性 

分 类 号：B0[哲学宗教—哲学理论]