从算计到深思:杜威的当代性

IF 0.7 0 HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Patrycja Kaszynska
{"title":"从算计到深思:杜威的当代性","authors":"Patrycja Kaszynska","doi":"10.1080/14735784.2021.1925568","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The word crisis comes from Ancient Greek κρίσις which can be translated as ‘power of distinguishing’ and is related to modern κρίνω which means ‘to pick out’. This is apt, because the pandemic of 2020 has exposed the limitation of approaches to social governance premised on calculation. The – some would argue false – choice between either saving lives or the economy, is the highest profile example of the necessity to ‘pick’ between different qualitative options. This has brought into relief something suppressed by the calculation approach, namely the need to adjudicate between multiple and competing value orientations in public life. With this, an alternative way of decision making in the public domain is needed, one that does not revert back to mere politics and subjective decisions. This article turns to the writings of John Dewey to look for alternatives. It shows that the model of deliberative inquiry found in Dewey, even though not without its own challenges, presents a viable option to replace metrics-based valuation approaches, without falling back on the whimsy of political judgement. This suggests that Dewey is not just contemporaneous, but that translating his insights into action could not be more urgent.","PeriodicalId":43943,"journal":{"name":"Culture Theory and Critique","volume":"26 1","pages":"154 - 166"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2021-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"From calculation to deliberation: the contemporaneity of Dewey\",\"authors\":\"Patrycja Kaszynska\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/14735784.2021.1925568\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT The word crisis comes from Ancient Greek κρίσις which can be translated as ‘power of distinguishing’ and is related to modern κρίνω which means ‘to pick out’. This is apt, because the pandemic of 2020 has exposed the limitation of approaches to social governance premised on calculation. The – some would argue false – choice between either saving lives or the economy, is the highest profile example of the necessity to ‘pick’ between different qualitative options. This has brought into relief something suppressed by the calculation approach, namely the need to adjudicate between multiple and competing value orientations in public life. With this, an alternative way of decision making in the public domain is needed, one that does not revert back to mere politics and subjective decisions. This article turns to the writings of John Dewey to look for alternatives. It shows that the model of deliberative inquiry found in Dewey, even though not without its own challenges, presents a viable option to replace metrics-based valuation approaches, without falling back on the whimsy of political judgement. This suggests that Dewey is not just contemporaneous, but that translating his insights into action could not be more urgent.\",\"PeriodicalId\":43943,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Culture Theory and Critique\",\"volume\":\"26 1\",\"pages\":\"154 - 166\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-04-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Culture Theory and Critique\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/14735784.2021.1925568\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Culture Theory and Critique","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14735784.2021.1925568","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

危机(crisis)一词源于古希腊文κρ末梢σις,意为“分辨的力量”,与现代的κρ末梢νω有关联,意为“挑选”。这是恰当的,因为2020年的大流行暴露了以计算为前提的社会治理方法的局限性。在拯救生命和经济之间做出选择——有些人会认为这是错误的——是在不同的定性选择之间“选择”的必要性的最引人注目的例子。这使被计算方法所压抑的某些东西得到了缓解,即需要在公共生活中多种相互竞争的价值取向之间做出裁决。因此,在公共领域需要另一种决策方式,这种方式不会回到纯粹的政治和主观决定。这篇文章转向约翰·杜威的著作来寻找替代方案。它表明,杜威所发现的审慎调查模式,尽管并非没有自身的挑战,但提供了一个可行的选择,可以取代基于指标的评估方法,而不会依赖于政治判断的异想天开。这表明杜威不仅是同时代的,而且将他的见解转化为行动是最紧迫的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
From calculation to deliberation: the contemporaneity of Dewey
ABSTRACT The word crisis comes from Ancient Greek κρίσις which can be translated as ‘power of distinguishing’ and is related to modern κρίνω which means ‘to pick out’. This is apt, because the pandemic of 2020 has exposed the limitation of approaches to social governance premised on calculation. The – some would argue false – choice between either saving lives or the economy, is the highest profile example of the necessity to ‘pick’ between different qualitative options. This has brought into relief something suppressed by the calculation approach, namely the need to adjudicate between multiple and competing value orientations in public life. With this, an alternative way of decision making in the public domain is needed, one that does not revert back to mere politics and subjective decisions. This article turns to the writings of John Dewey to look for alternatives. It shows that the model of deliberative inquiry found in Dewey, even though not without its own challenges, presents a viable option to replace metrics-based valuation approaches, without falling back on the whimsy of political judgement. This suggests that Dewey is not just contemporaneous, but that translating his insights into action could not be more urgent.
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
Culture Theory and Critique
Culture Theory and Critique HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
1.20
自引率
25.00%
发文量
6
×
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