波伏娃、伊里加雷与女性主义现象学的可能性

IF 0.3 3区 哲学 0 PHILOSOPHY
A. V. Leeuwen
{"title":"波伏娃、伊里加雷与女性主义现象学的可能性","authors":"A. V. Leeuwen","doi":"10.5325/JSPECPHIL.26.2.0474","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"It is quite easy to quickly pass over these two remarks without granting them any particular significance or weight. And yet, if we linger upon these statements for a moment, an altogether obvious but nevertheless important affinity between Beauvoir and Irigaray comes into view. Indeed, we see that what Beauvoir identifies as a failure of philosophical inquiry, Irigaray formulates as its positive task. At stake for each of these thinkers is the possibility of raising the question of sexual difference as a philosophical question. Of course, it is hardly remarkable to suggest that what these two canonical feminist philosophers share is a desire to pose the question of sexual difference in these terms. This moment of congruence, then, is not significant in and of itself but, rather, in virtue of the horizon of questioning that is opened up by it. The issue it raises is this: What does it mean to pose Beauvoir, Irigaray, and the Possibility of Feminist Phenomenology","PeriodicalId":44744,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Speculative Philosophy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2012-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.5325/JSPECPHIL.26.2.0474","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Beauvoir, Irigaray, and the Possibility of Feminist Phenomenology\",\"authors\":\"A. V. Leeuwen\",\"doi\":\"10.5325/JSPECPHIL.26.2.0474\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"It is quite easy to quickly pass over these two remarks without granting them any particular significance or weight. And yet, if we linger upon these statements for a moment, an altogether obvious but nevertheless important affinity between Beauvoir and Irigaray comes into view. Indeed, we see that what Beauvoir identifies as a failure of philosophical inquiry, Irigaray formulates as its positive task. At stake for each of these thinkers is the possibility of raising the question of sexual difference as a philosophical question. Of course, it is hardly remarkable to suggest that what these two canonical feminist philosophers share is a desire to pose the question of sexual difference in these terms. This moment of congruence, then, is not significant in and of itself but, rather, in virtue of the horizon of questioning that is opened up by it. The issue it raises is this: What does it mean to pose Beauvoir, Irigaray, and the Possibility of Feminist Phenomenology\",\"PeriodicalId\":44744,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Speculative Philosophy\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2012-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.5325/JSPECPHIL.26.2.0474\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Speculative Philosophy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5325/JSPECPHIL.26.2.0474\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"PHILOSOPHY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Speculative Philosophy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5325/JSPECPHIL.26.2.0474","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

摘要

这两句话很容易被迅速忽略,而不赋予它们任何特别的意义或分量。然而,如果我们在这些话上停留片刻,波伏娃和伊里加雷之间的一种十分明显而又十分重要的亲缘关系就显现出来了。的确,我们看到,波伏娃认为是哲学研究的失败,而伊里加雷却把它表述为哲学研究的积极任务。对于这些思想家来说,把性别差异的问题作为一个哲学问题提出来的可能性是利害攸关的。当然,这两位权威的女权主义哲学家都希望用这些术语来提出性别差异的问题,这一点也不值得注意。因此,这个一致的时刻本身并不重要,而是因为它打开了质疑的视野。它提出的问题是:把波伏娃、伊里加雷和女性主义现象学的可能性放在一起意味着什么
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Beauvoir, Irigaray, and the Possibility of Feminist Phenomenology
It is quite easy to quickly pass over these two remarks without granting them any particular significance or weight. And yet, if we linger upon these statements for a moment, an altogether obvious but nevertheless important affinity between Beauvoir and Irigaray comes into view. Indeed, we see that what Beauvoir identifies as a failure of philosophical inquiry, Irigaray formulates as its positive task. At stake for each of these thinkers is the possibility of raising the question of sexual difference as a philosophical question. Of course, it is hardly remarkable to suggest that what these two canonical feminist philosophers share is a desire to pose the question of sexual difference in these terms. This moment of congruence, then, is not significant in and of itself but, rather, in virtue of the horizon of questioning that is opened up by it. The issue it raises is this: What does it mean to pose Beauvoir, Irigaray, and the Possibility of Feminist Phenomenology
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
0.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
26
×
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