修昔底德《密提利尼辩论》与《米洛对话》中的内在批判

IF 0.4 Q3 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY
Otto H. Linderborg
{"title":"修昔底德《密提利尼辩论》与《米洛对话》中的内在批判","authors":"Otto H. Linderborg","doi":"10.1080/14409917.2022.2054184","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This article investigates social critique in Thucydides’ History of the Peloponnesian War. Two famous Thucydidean episodes are in focus: the Mytilenean Debate in Book III and the Melian Dialogue in Book V of the History. These episodes are interpreted here as inquiries assuming the shape of subversive and transformative social criticism: immanent critique. Immanent critique aims at shifting horizons of meaning in social contexts, and the philosophers practicing this kind of social criticism understand themselves as physicians of a failing society. In Thucydides’ work, a particular object of criticism is formed by varying dominant social and moral ordering principles. In the Mytilenean Debate, it is the principle of expediency (τò ξύμφορον) that rules, whereas in the Melian Dialogue the governing normative ordering principle is that of safety and survival (σωτηρíα). In each episode, a contending perspective is introduced for the purpose of undermining the dominating principle.","PeriodicalId":51905,"journal":{"name":"Critical Horizons","volume":"23 1","pages":"44 - 54"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Immanent Critique in Thucydides’ Mytilenean Debate and Melian Dialogue\",\"authors\":\"Otto H. Linderborg\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/14409917.2022.2054184\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT This article investigates social critique in Thucydides’ History of the Peloponnesian War. Two famous Thucydidean episodes are in focus: the Mytilenean Debate in Book III and the Melian Dialogue in Book V of the History. These episodes are interpreted here as inquiries assuming the shape of subversive and transformative social criticism: immanent critique. Immanent critique aims at shifting horizons of meaning in social contexts, and the philosophers practicing this kind of social criticism understand themselves as physicians of a failing society. In Thucydides’ work, a particular object of criticism is formed by varying dominant social and moral ordering principles. In the Mytilenean Debate, it is the principle of expediency (τò ξύμφορον) that rules, whereas in the Melian Dialogue the governing normative ordering principle is that of safety and survival (σωτηρíα). In each episode, a contending perspective is introduced for the purpose of undermining the dominating principle.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51905,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Critical Horizons\",\"volume\":\"23 1\",\"pages\":\"44 - 54\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Critical Horizons\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/14409917.2022.2054184\",\"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/10.1080/14409917.2022.2054184","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: 0

摘要

摘要本文考察修昔底德的《伯罗奔尼撒战争史》中的社会批判。修昔底德学派的两个著名篇章是重点:第三卷中的米提拉尼辩论和第五卷中的米洛对话。这些情节在这里被解释为具有颠覆性和变革性社会批评形式的探究:内在批判。内在批判旨在改变社会背景下的意义视野,实践这种社会批判的哲学家将自己理解为失败社会的医生。在修昔底德的著作中,一个特定的批评对象是由不同的主导社会和道德秩序原则形成的。在米提勒尼辩论中,权宜之计原则(τò ξ μφο ον)是规则,而在米利亚对话中,规范的秩序原则是安全和生存原则(σωτηρíα)。在每一集中,为了破坏主导原则,引入了一个竞争的视角。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Immanent Critique in Thucydides’ Mytilenean Debate and Melian Dialogue
ABSTRACT This article investigates social critique in Thucydides’ History of the Peloponnesian War. Two famous Thucydidean episodes are in focus: the Mytilenean Debate in Book III and the Melian Dialogue in Book V of the History. These episodes are interpreted here as inquiries assuming the shape of subversive and transformative social criticism: immanent critique. Immanent critique aims at shifting horizons of meaning in social contexts, and the philosophers practicing this kind of social criticism understand themselves as physicians of a failing society. In Thucydides’ work, a particular object of criticism is formed by varying dominant social and moral ordering principles. In the Mytilenean Debate, it is the principle of expediency (τò ξύμφορον) that rules, whereas in the Melian Dialogue the governing normative ordering principle is that of safety and survival (σωτηρíα). In each episode, a contending perspective is introduced for the purpose of undermining the dominating principle.
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