民主(阿伦特、亚里士多德)

Scatter 2 Pub Date : 2021-01-05 DOI:10.2307/j.ctv119918b.12
Geoffrey Bennington
{"title":"民主(阿伦特、亚里士多德)","authors":"Geoffrey Bennington","doi":"10.2307/j.ctv119918b.12","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Aristotle’s recognition of an irreducible plurality in politics is pursued initially in the context of his effaced recognition of the issue of sexual difference, as ambiguously retrieved for political thinking in Hannah Arendt. More generally, the complexities of Aristotle’s account of democracy as the least bad of “deviant” regimes is shown to lead to a more affirmative view of democracy once it is established that all political regimes are in a certain sense “deviant.” Aristotle’s own attempt to master the potential excess of democracy by appealing to the notion of the “mean” is shown to be incoherent, and his account of an extreme form of democracy as collapsing into anarchy is retrieved as an insight into the potentially catastrophic effects of trying to think democracy in teleological terms.","PeriodicalId":371657,"journal":{"name":"Scatter 2","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Democracy (Arendt, Aristotle)\",\"authors\":\"Geoffrey Bennington\",\"doi\":\"10.2307/j.ctv119918b.12\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Aristotle’s recognition of an irreducible plurality in politics is pursued initially in the context of his effaced recognition of the issue of sexual difference, as ambiguously retrieved for political thinking in Hannah Arendt. More generally, the complexities of Aristotle’s account of democracy as the least bad of “deviant” regimes is shown to lead to a more affirmative view of democracy once it is established that all political regimes are in a certain sense “deviant.” Aristotle’s own attempt to master the potential excess of democracy by appealing to the notion of the “mean” is shown to be incoherent, and his account of an extreme form of democracy as collapsing into anarchy is retrieved as an insight into the potentially catastrophic effects of trying to think democracy in teleological terms.\",\"PeriodicalId\":371657,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Scatter 2\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-01-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Scatter 2\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv119918b.12\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Scatter 2","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv119918b.12","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

亚里士多德对政治中不可简化的多元性的认识,最初是在他对性别差异问题的模糊认识的背景下进行的,这在汉娜·阿伦特的政治思想中是模糊的。更一般地说,亚里士多德将民主描述为最不坏的“越轨”政体的复杂性,显示出一旦所有政治政体在某种意义上都是“越轨”,就会导致对民主的更肯定的看法。亚里士多德自己试图通过诉诸“中庸”的概念来掌握民主的潜在过剩,这被证明是不连贯的,他对民主的极端形式崩溃为无政府状态的描述,被认为是对试图以目的论的方式思考民主的潜在灾难性影响的洞察。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Democracy (Arendt, Aristotle)
Aristotle’s recognition of an irreducible plurality in politics is pursued initially in the context of his effaced recognition of the issue of sexual difference, as ambiguously retrieved for political thinking in Hannah Arendt. More generally, the complexities of Aristotle’s account of democracy as the least bad of “deviant” regimes is shown to lead to a more affirmative view of democracy once it is established that all political regimes are in a certain sense “deviant.” Aristotle’s own attempt to master the potential excess of democracy by appealing to the notion of the “mean” is shown to be incoherent, and his account of an extreme form of democracy as collapsing into anarchy is retrieved as an insight into the potentially catastrophic effects of trying to think democracy in teleological terms.
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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