罗蒂论解释学的不公正、自由的重新描述与乌托邦想象

IF 0.1 0 PHILOSOPHY
F. Penelas
{"title":"罗蒂论解释学的不公正、自由的重新描述与乌托邦想象","authors":"F. Penelas","doi":"10.5944/ENDOXA.43.2019.19231","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"My purpose is to use Miranda Frickers’ concepts of testimonial injustice and hermeneutical injustice to draw a distinction between the policy of tolerance and the policy of solidarity in Rortyan liberalism.  I shall focus on the policy of solidarity interpreted as unfolding in two phases of the imagination: the phase of critical imagination and that of utopian imagination. I advocate that critical imagination may be understood as focusing on overcoming hermeneutical injustice through what I term liberal redescription.  Lastly, I critique the Rortyan project on what I view as an inadequate inclination to restrict critical imagination on the basis of adopting a criterion that focuses on flaws in the development of utopian imagination.","PeriodicalId":53780,"journal":{"name":"Endoxa-Series Filosoficas","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2019-06-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.5944/ENDOXA.43.2019.19231","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Rorty on Hermeneutical Injustice, Liberal Redescription and Utopian Imagination\",\"authors\":\"F. Penelas\",\"doi\":\"10.5944/ENDOXA.43.2019.19231\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"My purpose is to use Miranda Frickers’ concepts of testimonial injustice and hermeneutical injustice to draw a distinction between the policy of tolerance and the policy of solidarity in Rortyan liberalism.  I shall focus on the policy of solidarity interpreted as unfolding in two phases of the imagination: the phase of critical imagination and that of utopian imagination. I advocate that critical imagination may be understood as focusing on overcoming hermeneutical injustice through what I term liberal redescription.  Lastly, I critique the Rortyan project on what I view as an inadequate inclination to restrict critical imagination on the basis of adopting a criterion that focuses on flaws in the development of utopian imagination.\",\"PeriodicalId\":53780,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Endoxa-Series Filosoficas\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-06-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.5944/ENDOXA.43.2019.19231\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Endoxa-Series Filosoficas\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5944/ENDOXA.43.2019.19231\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"PHILOSOPHY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Endoxa-Series Filosoficas","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5944/ENDOXA.43.2019.19231","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

摘要

我的目的是利用米兰达·弗里克斯的证明不公正和解释学不公正的概念来区分罗自由主义中的宽容政策和团结政策。我将重点讨论团结政策,它被解释为在想象的两个阶段展开:批判性想象阶段和乌托邦想象阶段。我主张批判性想象可以被理解为通过我所说的自由主义重新描述来克服解释学的不公正。最后,我批评了Rortyan项目,我认为这是一种不充分的倾向,即在采用一种关注乌托邦想象力发展缺陷的标准的基础上限制批判性想象力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Rorty on Hermeneutical Injustice, Liberal Redescription and Utopian Imagination
My purpose is to use Miranda Frickers’ concepts of testimonial injustice and hermeneutical injustice to draw a distinction between the policy of tolerance and the policy of solidarity in Rortyan liberalism.  I shall focus on the policy of solidarity interpreted as unfolding in two phases of the imagination: the phase of critical imagination and that of utopian imagination. I advocate that critical imagination may be understood as focusing on overcoming hermeneutical injustice through what I term liberal redescription.  Lastly, I critique the Rortyan project on what I view as an inadequate inclination to restrict critical imagination on the basis of adopting a criterion that focuses on flaws in the development of utopian imagination.
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
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
16
期刊介绍: The University Journal of Philosophy, ÉNDOXA, is edited by the Faculty of Philosophy at the National University of Distance Learning (UNED). It was founded in 1993 and appears at six-month intervals. It includes original articles, discussions, conferences, publication reports and reviews by contributors who belong to the community of teachers, researches and graduates from all regions and countries where the university is present. As this presence includes most of the Ibero-American world and a great part of Europe, we accept contributions in the most widely spoken languages of the Western world (Spanish, English, French, Portuguese, German and Italian).
×
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