朱迪思·巴特勒和认知框架的政治

IF 0.4 Q3 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY
G. Rae
{"title":"朱迪思·巴特勒和认知框架的政治","authors":"G. Rae","doi":"10.1080/14409917.2022.2081410","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Judith Butler’s work has tended to be read through two axes: (1) an early gender theory/later ethical theory division, and/or (2) an ethical/political divide. In contrast, I aim to undercut both hermeneutical strategies by turning to her epistemology, as manifested through her analyses of normativity and “frames,” to argue that the latter acts as the hinge uniting her so-called early and later works and the ethical and political dimensions of her thinking. From this premise, I maintain that Butler (1) affirms that these frames are conditioned by power relations and contingency, (2) points to the existence of multiple frameworks that simultaneously compete against one another, and (3) insists that frames are culturally specific and determining of the categories that identify what counts as a legitimate life for a particular community and the ways in which each (form of) life is to be treated. By highlighting the social, performative, and normative dimensions of epistemic practices, Butler offers an epistemology based in the construction of contingent and contestable frameworks and shows how the contestation between distinct frameworks conditions the ethical-political life of each community.","PeriodicalId":51905,"journal":{"name":"Critical Horizons","volume":"23 1","pages":"172 - 187"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Judith Butler and the Politics of Epistemic Frames\",\"authors\":\"G. Rae\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/14409917.2022.2081410\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT Judith Butler’s work has tended to be read through two axes: (1) an early gender theory/later ethical theory division, and/or (2) an ethical/political divide. In contrast, I aim to undercut both hermeneutical strategies by turning to her epistemology, as manifested through her analyses of normativity and “frames,” to argue that the latter acts as the hinge uniting her so-called early and later works and the ethical and political dimensions of her thinking. From this premise, I maintain that Butler (1) affirms that these frames are conditioned by power relations and contingency, (2) points to the existence of multiple frameworks that simultaneously compete against one another, and (3) insists that frames are culturally specific and determining of the categories that identify what counts as a legitimate life for a particular community and the ways in which each (form of) life is to be treated. By highlighting the social, performative, and normative dimensions of epistemic practices, Butler offers an epistemology based in the construction of contingent and contestable frameworks and shows how the contestation between distinct frameworks conditions the ethical-political life of each community.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51905,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Critical Horizons\",\"volume\":\"23 1\",\"pages\":\"172 - 187\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-04-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Critical Horizons\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/14409917.2022.2081410\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Critical Horizons","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14409917.2022.2081410","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

摘要Judith Butler的作品倾向于从两个轴来解读:(1)早期的性别理论/后期的伦理理论分歧,和/或(2)伦理/政治分歧。相反,我的目的是通过转向她的认识论来削弱这两种解释学策略,正如她对规范性和“框架”的分析所表明的那样,认为后者是她所谓的早期和后期作品以及她思想的伦理和政治维度的枢纽。从这个前提出发,我认为Butler(1)肯定了这些框架是受权力关系和偶然性制约的,(2)指出存在多个同时相互竞争的框架,以及(3)坚持认为,框架是特定于文化的,并确定了确定特定社区合法生活的类别,以及对待每种(形式)生活的方式。通过强调认识实践的社会、表现和规范维度,巴特勒提供了一种基于偶然和可竞争框架构建的认识论,并展示了不同框架之间的竞争如何影响每个社区的道德政治生活。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Judith Butler and the Politics of Epistemic Frames
ABSTRACT Judith Butler’s work has tended to be read through two axes: (1) an early gender theory/later ethical theory division, and/or (2) an ethical/political divide. In contrast, I aim to undercut both hermeneutical strategies by turning to her epistemology, as manifested through her analyses of normativity and “frames,” to argue that the latter acts as the hinge uniting her so-called early and later works and the ethical and political dimensions of her thinking. From this premise, I maintain that Butler (1) affirms that these frames are conditioned by power relations and contingency, (2) points to the existence of multiple frameworks that simultaneously compete against one another, and (3) insists that frames are culturally specific and determining of the categories that identify what counts as a legitimate life for a particular community and the ways in which each (form of) life is to be treated. By highlighting the social, performative, and normative dimensions of epistemic practices, Butler offers an epistemology based in the construction of contingent and contestable frameworks and shows how the contestation between distinct frameworks conditions the ethical-political life of each community.
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
Critical Horizons
Critical Horizons SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
18
×
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