书评:约翰·阿西马科普洛斯,《壮观的政治经济学与后现代种姓》。

IF 0.1
Garrick Harden
{"title":"书评:约翰·阿西马科普洛斯,《壮观的政治经济学与后现代种姓》。","authors":"Garrick Harden","doi":"10.3798/tia.1937-0237.2306","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Dr. John Asimakopoulos has crafted a fascinating study into the larger debate regarding social structure within the context of postmodern culture. During the latter half of the Twentieth century and into this third decade of the Twenty-First century, there has been passionate debate across disciplines on the reality of postmodern culture. Jürgen Habermas and Jean-François Lyotard argued about modernity’s continued existence with Habermas, as well as notable scholars such as Anthony Giddens, declaring modernity an “unfinished project;” and drawing from Eighteenth and Nineteenth century German Idealism, especially Georg Hegel, as a “juggernaut” and that we have no choice but to allow modernity to steamroll over anyone and everyone until it plays itself out. We have Noam Chomsky and Michel Foucault debating the notion of “human nature” from Modernist and Poststructuralist (respectively) perspectives; we have the Sokal Affair when a mathematician was able to publish a joke paper in a postmodern journal deconstructing the notion of the atom. We had books telling us to “forget Foucault” or to “forget Baudrillard.” Though the larger debate in academia was never resolved, few scholars discuss it now. Looking at the history of the overall debate, it would be easy to conclude that scholars ended at an impasse and that these lines of theoretical thought are intellectual dead ends.","PeriodicalId":42347,"journal":{"name":"Theory in Action","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Book Review: John Asimakopoulos, The Political Economy of the Spectacle and Postmodern Caste.\",\"authors\":\"Garrick Harden\",\"doi\":\"10.3798/tia.1937-0237.2306\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Dr. John Asimakopoulos has crafted a fascinating study into the larger debate regarding social structure within the context of postmodern culture. During the latter half of the Twentieth century and into this third decade of the Twenty-First century, there has been passionate debate across disciplines on the reality of postmodern culture. Jürgen Habermas and Jean-François Lyotard argued about modernity’s continued existence with Habermas, as well as notable scholars such as Anthony Giddens, declaring modernity an “unfinished project;” and drawing from Eighteenth and Nineteenth century German Idealism, especially Georg Hegel, as a “juggernaut” and that we have no choice but to allow modernity to steamroll over anyone and everyone until it plays itself out. We have Noam Chomsky and Michel Foucault debating the notion of “human nature” from Modernist and Poststructuralist (respectively) perspectives; we have the Sokal Affair when a mathematician was able to publish a joke paper in a postmodern journal deconstructing the notion of the atom. We had books telling us to “forget Foucault” or to “forget Baudrillard.” Though the larger debate in academia was never resolved, few scholars discuss it now. Looking at the history of the overall debate, it would be easy to conclude that scholars ended at an impasse and that these lines of theoretical thought are intellectual dead ends.\",\"PeriodicalId\":42347,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Theory in Action\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Theory in Action\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3798/tia.1937-0237.2306\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Theory in Action","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3798/tia.1937-0237.2306","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

John Asimakopoulos博士对后现代文化背景下关于社会结构的更大辩论进行了一项引人入胜的研究。在二十世纪后半叶和二十一世纪的第三个十年里,各学科对后现代文化的现实性展开了激烈的辩论。于尔根·哈贝马斯(Jürgen Habermas)和让-弗朗索瓦·利奥塔(Jean-François Lyotard,作为一个“庞然大物”,我们别无选择,只能让现代性压倒任何人,直到它发挥出来。诺姆·乔姆斯基和米歇尔·福柯分别从现代主义和后结构主义的角度对“人性”概念进行了辩论;我们有索卡尔事件,当时一位数学家能够在一本后现代杂志上发表一篇笑话论文,解构原子的概念。我们有书告诉我们“忘记福柯”或“忘记鲍德里亚”。尽管学术界的更大争论从未解决,但现在很少有学者讨论它。纵观整个辩论的历史,很容易得出这样的结论:学者们最终陷入僵局,这些理论思路是智力上的死胡同。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Book Review: John Asimakopoulos, The Political Economy of the Spectacle and Postmodern Caste.
Dr. John Asimakopoulos has crafted a fascinating study into the larger debate regarding social structure within the context of postmodern culture. During the latter half of the Twentieth century and into this third decade of the Twenty-First century, there has been passionate debate across disciplines on the reality of postmodern culture. Jürgen Habermas and Jean-François Lyotard argued about modernity’s continued existence with Habermas, as well as notable scholars such as Anthony Giddens, declaring modernity an “unfinished project;” and drawing from Eighteenth and Nineteenth century German Idealism, especially Georg Hegel, as a “juggernaut” and that we have no choice but to allow modernity to steamroll over anyone and everyone until it plays itself out. We have Noam Chomsky and Michel Foucault debating the notion of “human nature” from Modernist and Poststructuralist (respectively) perspectives; we have the Sokal Affair when a mathematician was able to publish a joke paper in a postmodern journal deconstructing the notion of the atom. We had books telling us to “forget Foucault” or to “forget Baudrillard.” Though the larger debate in academia was never resolved, few scholars discuss it now. Looking at the history of the overall debate, it would be easy to conclude that scholars ended at an impasse and that these lines of theoretical thought are intellectual dead ends.
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
Theory in Action
Theory in Action SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY-
自引率
0.00%
发文量
34
×
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