CREATIVE DISINTEGRATION: THE PERPETUAL EMERGENCE OF MODERN POLITICAL THOUGHT

IF 1.1 2区 历史学 Q1 HISTORY
IAN HUNTER
{"title":"CREATIVE DISINTEGRATION: THE PERPETUAL EMERGENCE OF MODERN POLITICAL THOUGHT","authors":"IAN HUNTER","doi":"10.1111/hith.12376","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n <p>Michael Sonenscher's <i>After Kant: The Romans, the Germans, and the Moderns in the History of Political Thought</i> offers a rich overview of nineteenth-century French, Swiss, and German political thought. The work's central argument is that modern political thought emerges in a series of attempts to close germinal “gaps” opened in the fabric of European intellectual life by Kant's philosophy and philosophical history. Less a narrative than a bricolage, the work consists of a myriad of intellectual cameos, walk-on roles, philosophical speculations, and political and social theories whose detail threatens to overwhelm even the most assiduous reader. The most striking feature of Sonenscher's book, however, is its theoretical method. Measuring his distance from both dialectical philosophical history and Cambridge school contextualism, Sonenscher makes powerful use of a method of intellectual history whose last great exponent was Arthur Lovejoy. Under this method, political thought is neither governed by the telos of self-consciousness nor explicable in terms of the historical circumstances in which it has arisen and whose uses and purposes it might serve. Instead, political thought “emerges” unforeseen from a condition of sheer metaphysical indeterminacy. This condition is brought about by the dissolution of prior conceptual oppositions in an amnesic maelstrom of inversions, arguments, and debates. New oppositions are then created through “chance and choice” only to disintegrate in their turn, leading to further cycles of destruction and recreation that Sonenscher calls “palingenesis.” This anti-contextual method is responsible for the rich mosaic of intellectual fragments that the reader encounters in this engaging book. It is also responsible for the book's central shortcoming, for it renders the author oblivious to the way in which their impact on those forced to live and think through them makes historical circumstances resistant to their metaphysical liquefaction, with this in turn making Sonenscher heedless of the historian's duty to investigate these circumstances.</p>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":47473,"journal":{"name":"History and Theory","volume":"64 2","pages":"281-300"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"History and Theory","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/hith.12376","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Michael Sonenscher's After Kant: The Romans, the Germans, and the Moderns in the History of Political Thought offers a rich overview of nineteenth-century French, Swiss, and German political thought. The work's central argument is that modern political thought emerges in a series of attempts to close germinal “gaps” opened in the fabric of European intellectual life by Kant's philosophy and philosophical history. Less a narrative than a bricolage, the work consists of a myriad of intellectual cameos, walk-on roles, philosophical speculations, and political and social theories whose detail threatens to overwhelm even the most assiduous reader. The most striking feature of Sonenscher's book, however, is its theoretical method. Measuring his distance from both dialectical philosophical history and Cambridge school contextualism, Sonenscher makes powerful use of a method of intellectual history whose last great exponent was Arthur Lovejoy. Under this method, political thought is neither governed by the telos of self-consciousness nor explicable in terms of the historical circumstances in which it has arisen and whose uses and purposes it might serve. Instead, political thought “emerges” unforeseen from a condition of sheer metaphysical indeterminacy. This condition is brought about by the dissolution of prior conceptual oppositions in an amnesic maelstrom of inversions, arguments, and debates. New oppositions are then created through “chance and choice” only to disintegrate in their turn, leading to further cycles of destruction and recreation that Sonenscher calls “palingenesis.” This anti-contextual method is responsible for the rich mosaic of intellectual fragments that the reader encounters in this engaging book. It is also responsible for the book's central shortcoming, for it renders the author oblivious to the way in which their impact on those forced to live and think through them makes historical circumstances resistant to their metaphysical liquefaction, with this in turn making Sonenscher heedless of the historian's duty to investigate these circumstances.

创造性解体:现代政治思想的不断涌现
迈克尔·索南舍尔的《康德之后:政治思想史上的罗马人、日耳曼人和现代人》对19世纪法国、瑞士和德国的政治思想进行了丰富的概述。本书的中心论点是,现代政治思想是在一系列试图弥合康德哲学和哲学史在欧洲知识分子生活结构中打开的萌芽“缺口”的尝试中出现的。与其说是叙述,不如说是拼凑,这部作品由无数的知识分子客串,跑龙套的角色,哲学思考,政治和社会理论组成,其细节甚至可能压倒最勤奋的读者。然而,索南舍尔这本书最显著的特点是它的理论方法。索南舍尔在衡量自己与辩证哲学史和剑桥学派语境主义的距离时,有力地运用了一种思想史的方法,这种方法的最后一位伟大代表是阿瑟·洛夫乔伊。在这种方法下,政治思想既不受自我意识的目的支配,也不能用它产生的历史环境及其可能服务的用途和目的来解释。相反,政治思想从纯粹形而上学的不确定性中不可预见地“浮现”出来。这种情况是由于在颠倒、论证和辩论的失忆漩涡中,先前的概念对立被消解而造成的。然后,通过“机会和选择”创造出新的对立,只会反过来瓦解,导致进一步的破坏和再造循环,索内舍尔称之为“轮回”。这种反语境的方法是读者在这本引人入胜的书中遇到的丰富的智力片段的马赛克。这也是这本书的主要缺点,因为它使作者忽略了它们对那些被迫生活和思考它们的人的影响,使历史环境抵制了它们形而上学的升华,这反过来又使索南舍尔忽视了历史学家调查这些环境的责任。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
History and Theory
History and Theory Multiple-
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
9.10%
发文量
36
期刊介绍: History and Theory leads the way in exploring the nature of history. Prominent international thinkers contribute their reflections in the following areas: critical philosophy of history, speculative philosophy of history, historiography, history of historiography, historical methodology, critical theory, and time and culture. Related disciplines are also covered within the journal, including interactions between history and the natural and social sciences, the humanities, and psychology.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信