批判全球研究与行星史:启蒙运动的新视角

Iwan-Michelangelo D'Aprile
{"title":"批判全球研究与行星史:启蒙运动的新视角","authors":"Iwan-Michelangelo D'Aprile","doi":"10.1515/9783110492415-025","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":": Though doing so invites methodological problems, the concept of ‘ the Enlightenment ’ is nevertheless in need of widening: it can no longer be reduced to any one historical period; nor can it be restricted to Europe. As a process of rationalization, scientification, technification, secularization, or democratiza-tion, forms of Enlightenment can be identified in many periods and regions. I wish to argue here that an expanded meaning opens up opportunities for an enhanced and interdisciplinary Enlightenment research. On the basis of two recent approaches to the Enlightenment — by Felicity A. Nussbaum and Dipesh Chakrabarty — I will try to show the interdependency of period and process notions, and ponder the ways in which they inform one another. A combined reading of both approaches shows how they might serve as models for a specific form of interdisciplinary global history in the heritage of the Enlightenment.","PeriodicalId":126664,"journal":{"name":"Philosophy of Globalization","volume":"4 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-06-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Critical Global Studies and Planetary History: New Perspectives on the Enlightenment\",\"authors\":\"Iwan-Michelangelo D'Aprile\",\"doi\":\"10.1515/9783110492415-025\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\": Though doing so invites methodological problems, the concept of ‘ the Enlightenment ’ is nevertheless in need of widening: it can no longer be reduced to any one historical period; nor can it be restricted to Europe. As a process of rationalization, scientification, technification, secularization, or democratiza-tion, forms of Enlightenment can be identified in many periods and regions. I wish to argue here that an expanded meaning opens up opportunities for an enhanced and interdisciplinary Enlightenment research. On the basis of two recent approaches to the Enlightenment — by Felicity A. Nussbaum and Dipesh Chakrabarty — I will try to show the interdependency of period and process notions, and ponder the ways in which they inform one another. A combined reading of both approaches shows how they might serve as models for a specific form of interdisciplinary global history in the heritage of the Enlightenment.\",\"PeriodicalId\":126664,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Philosophy of Globalization\",\"volume\":\"4 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-06-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Philosophy of Globalization\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110492415-025\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Philosophy of Globalization","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110492415-025","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

虽然这样做会引起方法论上的问题,但“启蒙运动”的概念仍然需要扩大:它不能再被缩小到任何一个历史时期;也不能局限于欧洲。作为一个理性化、科学化、技术化、世俗化或民主化的过程,启蒙运动的形式可以在许多时期和地区被识别出来。我想在此指出,扩大的意义为加强和跨学科的启蒙研究开辟了机会。基于费利西蒂·a·努斯鲍姆(Felicity A. Nussbaum)和迪佩什·查克拉巴蒂(Dipesh Chakrabarty)最近对启蒙运动的两种研究方法,我将尝试展示时期和过程概念的相互依赖性,并思考它们相互联系的方式。对这两种方法的综合解读表明,它们如何可以作为启蒙运动遗产中跨学科全球历史的特定形式的模型。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Critical Global Studies and Planetary History: New Perspectives on the Enlightenment
: Though doing so invites methodological problems, the concept of ‘ the Enlightenment ’ is nevertheless in need of widening: it can no longer be reduced to any one historical period; nor can it be restricted to Europe. As a process of rationalization, scientification, technification, secularization, or democratiza-tion, forms of Enlightenment can be identified in many periods and regions. I wish to argue here that an expanded meaning opens up opportunities for an enhanced and interdisciplinary Enlightenment research. On the basis of two recent approaches to the Enlightenment — by Felicity A. Nussbaum and Dipesh Chakrabarty — I will try to show the interdependency of period and process notions, and ponder the ways in which they inform one another. A combined reading of both approaches shows how they might serve as models for a specific form of interdisciplinary global history in the heritage of the Enlightenment.
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信