现代政治哲学中个人主义的蜕变

Q3 Arts and Humanities
Sententiae Pub Date : 2023-12-31 DOI:10.31649/sent01.01.192
Natalia Spasenko
{"title":"现代政治哲学中个人主义的蜕变","authors":"Natalia Spasenko","doi":"10.31649/sent01.01.192","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The author, following Niklas Luhmann, interprets the opposition \"individual-society\" as one of the pillars to which the ideological content of modern society is anchored. The same can be said about political philosophy: no matter how we understand the term \"society\" (in terms of collectivism, communalism, or holism), individualism is always understood as something ontologically rooted, as a constitutive factor of political space. Despite the resistance of influential opponents, methodological individualism has not become either a historical relic or a synonym for professional incompetence. Attempts to overcome this resistance led to the realization of a speculative tendency – self-description, which, according to Luhmann, inevitably constitutes itself as an ideology. However, individualism in the Modernity did not manifest itself as a strategy of a particular \"-ology\", but as a practical, non-contemplative strategy of political philosophy. The author agrees with Peter Koslowski that the question of the nature of the opposition \"individual-society\" can be answered only hypothetically. After all, this duality appears as: (1) a product of the historical process of individuation; (2) the result of the development of social production, the transition to private property; (3) an initial property of conditio humana. In contrast to other epochs, Modernity was the only one to propose to exclude the will to the common from individual motivations, to monistically present the individual concept of the good as a desire for personal gain.","PeriodicalId":37673,"journal":{"name":"Sententiae","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Metamorphoses of individualism in Modern political philosophy\",\"authors\":\"Natalia Spasenko\",\"doi\":\"10.31649/sent01.01.192\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The author, following Niklas Luhmann, interprets the opposition \\\"individual-society\\\" as one of the pillars to which the ideological content of modern society is anchored. The same can be said about political philosophy: no matter how we understand the term \\\"society\\\" (in terms of collectivism, communalism, or holism), individualism is always understood as something ontologically rooted, as a constitutive factor of political space. Despite the resistance of influential opponents, methodological individualism has not become either a historical relic or a synonym for professional incompetence. Attempts to overcome this resistance led to the realization of a speculative tendency – self-description, which, according to Luhmann, inevitably constitutes itself as an ideology. However, individualism in the Modernity did not manifest itself as a strategy of a particular \\\"-ology\\\", but as a practical, non-contemplative strategy of political philosophy. The author agrees with Peter Koslowski that the question of the nature of the opposition \\\"individual-society\\\" can be answered only hypothetically. After all, this duality appears as: (1) a product of the historical process of individuation; (2) the result of the development of social production, the transition to private property; (3) an initial property of conditio humana. In contrast to other epochs, Modernity was the only one to propose to exclude the will to the common from individual motivations, to monistically present the individual concept of the good as a desire for personal gain.\",\"PeriodicalId\":37673,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Sententiae\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Sententiae\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.31649/sent01.01.192\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sententiae","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31649/sent01.01.192","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

作者效仿尼克拉斯-卢曼(Niklas Luhmann),将 "个人-社会 "对立解释为现代社会意识形态内容的支柱之一。政治哲学也是如此:无论我们如何理解 "社会 "一词(集体主义、社群主义或整体主义),个人主义始终被理解为本体论上的根基,是政治空间的构成因素。尽管受到有影响力的反对者的抵制,方法论上的个人主义并没有成为历史的遗迹或专业无能的代名词。试图克服这种阻力的努力导致了一种投机倾向的实现--自我描述,根据卢曼的观点,这种自我描述不可避免地构成了一种意识形态。然而,现代性中的个人主义并不表现为一种特定"-神学 "的策略,而是一种实用的、非沉思性的政治哲学策略。作者同意彼得-科斯洛夫斯基的观点,即 "个人-社会 "对立的本质问题只能假设性地回答。毕竟,这种二元对立是(1)个体化历史进程的产物;(2)社会生产发展、向私有财产过渡的结果;(3)人类条件的初始属性。与其他时代相比,现代性是唯一一个提出将共同意志排除在个人动机之外,将个人的善的概念一元化为对个人利益的渴望的时代。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Metamorphoses of individualism in Modern political philosophy
The author, following Niklas Luhmann, interprets the opposition "individual-society" as one of the pillars to which the ideological content of modern society is anchored. The same can be said about political philosophy: no matter how we understand the term "society" (in terms of collectivism, communalism, or holism), individualism is always understood as something ontologically rooted, as a constitutive factor of political space. Despite the resistance of influential opponents, methodological individualism has not become either a historical relic or a synonym for professional incompetence. Attempts to overcome this resistance led to the realization of a speculative tendency – self-description, which, according to Luhmann, inevitably constitutes itself as an ideology. However, individualism in the Modernity did not manifest itself as a strategy of a particular "-ology", but as a practical, non-contemplative strategy of political philosophy. The author agrees with Peter Koslowski that the question of the nature of the opposition "individual-society" can be answered only hypothetically. After all, this duality appears as: (1) a product of the historical process of individuation; (2) the result of the development of social production, the transition to private property; (3) an initial property of conditio humana. In contrast to other epochs, Modernity was the only one to propose to exclude the will to the common from individual motivations, to monistically present the individual concept of the good as a desire for personal gain.
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
Sententiae
Sententiae Arts and Humanities-Philosophy
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
27
期刊介绍: Sententiae is historico-philosophical open access journal. Journal created by Modern philosophy''s research group (Pascalian society). Founded in 2000. Published twice a year, in June and December. Our purpose is to foster the development of a wide gamut of contemporary approaches, active implementation of them into research practice, and establishment of high standards of teaching philosophy basing on the achievements of contemporary history of philosophy. Our key priority is to ensure the empirical substantiation of historico-philosophical conceptions, basing on the criteria of literality, exhaustivity, contextuality and taking into account the existing speculative interpretations. Jean-Luc Marion was the first to formulate this set of criteria in 1998 as the main features of contemporary researches of Descartes''s philosophy. We regard these principles as the methodological background of any substantiated research method in the history of philosophy. Publishing materials on all historico-philosophical topics, we pay special attention to researches in terminology, issues of philosophical translation and untranslatability, manuscript researches (including handwritten heritage of Kyiv-Mohyla Academy professors of ХVІІ–ХVІІІ century), and cover the development of large-scale projects in this area. We also publish new bilingual and commented Ukrainian translations of classical foreign philosophical texts. Among our priorities there is also a coverage of the history of philosophical thought in Ukraine and other Eastern European countries and its relations to the wider cultural context (theology, literature, natural sciences, political ideology etc). The content of each issue is distributed according to Genre Sections and Thematic Headings. Currently there are 10 Genre Sections.
×
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