论哈贝马斯的"实践话语"理论

哈贝马斯从理论与实践的关系问题出发引出了他的"话语"理论,并基于实践与技术的区分强调了话语的实践性质,提出了"实践话语"的观念。在这种实践话语中,话语参与者以语言为媒介,针对共同生活世界中的公共议题,为了论证规范的有效性而进行提议、批判、争论和证明,从而达成了具有普遍有效性的合理共识。这样,在公共领域中,他所提出的这种实践话语理论就将伦理话语、道德话语和政治话语这三个维度内在地融合在一起,从而成为多元的价值主体之间形成合理政治共识的一种可能路径。     

融入交往范式的意向主义意义理论——从胡塞尔到哈贝马斯

意向主义的意义理论既是英美分析行为理论研究中的一个重要方面,也是欧陆现象学研究中的一项主要内容.胡塞尔、格莱斯和塞尔的意向主义意义理论在上述研究中有着相似之处,即都将语言的意义与意向性之间的密切关系置于语言的交往之中.通过哈贝马斯对其还原主义倾向以及解释能力等方面的批判.意向主义的意义理论融入交往的形式语用学范式的必然性得到凸现     

一种肯定式的批判——哈贝马斯批判理论与马克思主义

哈贝马斯的批判理论是法兰克福学派在1940年代与马克思主义疏离之后,重新向理性和现代性传统的回归。它继承马克思主义的批判特质并忠于马克思主义的解放灵感,呈现出西方马克思主义在当代发展进程中的诸多新特征:在元哲学基础、批判模式以及构建目标等方面对马克思主义传统充满了反思和审视;对交往、交往理性、反思以及激进民主制理想的重视又为马克思主义在当今世界的发展提供了新的探索和补充。     

世界宪法中的语言权利和语言公平

官方语言是一个政府在立法、司法、公共管理和教学等领域的日常活动中所使用的语言;民族语言是一个民族用于象征目的的语言.在世界上的很多地方,官方语言和民族语言都是并存的,但却未必和谐.在许多大民族语言和少数民族语言之间存在着统治与被统治的关系.因此,对主要语言的立法,尤其是在宪法中,彰显了一个国家内各种并存语言之间存在的冲突.在理想意义上,语言立法的目的在于通过立法界定并存语言的地位和用法,以解决这类冲突和差异,但是实际上,语言立法有时被用以昭示一个语言群体优于另一个群体的统治权力,而不是解决说话人之间的冲突.     

论威廉姆·洪堡的语言世界观

论威廉姆·洪堡的语言世界观孙周兴在二十世纪西方哲学思想中，语言维度的突现已成一件大事。总括起来，我们可以说，现当代的西方哲学家们已形成了以下几点“共识”。一、“语言交往”是人类生存的根本方式，“语言交往共同体”是人类文化的基本单元；二、语言是人类知识...     

在共同体的视角中看民主

人类社会是以共同体的形式出现的,在人类历史上的不同阶段,共同体的性质是不一样的.在农业社会的历史阶段,人类的共同体形式属于家元共同体的范畴;在工业化的过程中,人类建构起了族阈共同体;全球化和后工业化的进程将是合作共同体对族闽共同体的替代.从共同体的视角来看民主可以发现,民主具有一个生成和蜕变的过程.家元共同体是一个完全集权的社会,而族阈共同体则建构起了民主制度和民主的治理方式.但是,族阈共同体中的民主处于差异与共识不可调和的矛盾之中,从而造成了民主的困境.随着合作共同体对族阈共同体的替代,民主将在蜕变中得到提升,从而成为合乎人类民主理想的真正的实质性民主.     

批判理性及其与现代性的关系：－评现代性问题上哈贝马斯与福柯的对立

本文认为 ,哈贝马斯与福柯对现代性的态度形成了水火之势。对福柯来说 ,语言的交往是哈贝马斯的“倾向于互相理解”的反题 ,语言以“散布的方式”而存在 ,决定了要想使语言形式化 ,就必须脱去具体内容并只让那些有效的话语形式出现。由于哈氏话语伦理所具有的“认知主义”、“总体化”的倾向 ,这里存在着难以察觉的“权利”微妙操作 ,隐藏着“认知意志”的自负。哈贝马斯的“主体间性”构想虽有意义 ,但由于缺乏存在论的分析 ,因而 ,并没有真正克服“方法论的唯我主义”。     

哈贝马斯言语行为理论:阐释·批判·回应

哈贝马斯的言语行为理论在其社会批判理论中占有重要地位。他认为,社会秩序得以可能的基础是交往行为,而交往行为得以可能的基础是言语行为,因此,以言语行为为中介的交往行为是社会秩序得以可能的基础。为构建完善的交往行为理论,哈贝马斯提出并深刻阐述了他的言语行为三重功能模式论。这个理论受到多方批判,其中爱尔兰皇家科学院院士梅芙.库克教授的批判最具有代表性。哈贝马斯将言语行为区分为以成功为取向的策略行为和以达成理解为取向的交往行为,这对交往行为理论和社会的合理化具有十分重要的作用,但是,这种先验语用学的区分是难以为继的。哈贝马斯将命令式言语行为也作为一个独立的言语行为类型予以阐述,这一点是存在问题的,因为哈贝马斯没有看到命令式言语行为所承载的权力要求实质上就是调节式言语行为所要求的规范正确性要求。     

"事实"与"规范"的关系:一个哲学问题的政治-法律含义

“事实”与“规范”的关系既是现代哲学的重要理论问题,也是现代社会的重要实践问题,更确切地说,是一个具有重要的政治—法律含义的哲学问题。从讨论“事实”与“规范”的关系(或“事实性”与“有效性”)的关系入手,德国哲学家哈贝马斯提出了他所谓的“商谈的民主理论”和“程序主义的法律范式”,并设法在这个新的基础上批判资本主义现实、辩护社会主义理想。厘清哈贝马斯的政治—法律理论的复杂论证,研究这个产生于特殊语境的理论的可能的普遍意义,有助于我们思考什么是有中国特色的社会主义法治国家、有中国特色的社会主义协商民主。     

规范的重建和反思——从哈贝马斯到霍内特

规范基础的问题是批判理论的中心问题,哈贝马斯构建了以普遍语用学为基础的交往行为理论,对这一问题加以阐明.然而,以语言理论为条件的交往范式遭到了法兰克福学派第三代代表人物霍内特的质疑,霍内特在反思哈贝马斯语言理论的基础上,提出了以其承认理论为基础的交往范武.规范问题又回溯到了一个老的话题,即社会发展动力的问题.     

反对文化冲突和恐怖战争:文化间对话的形式

哈贝马斯区分了交往中对实践理性的三种运用,其中包含着对实践理性的误解。文章通过对哈贝马斯理论的修改提出对文化间对话的三种主要类型:实用的—策略性的交往、道德的—普遍的商谈、伦理的—解释学的对话,再加上一种子类型:悲痛的对话或者辩论。这些对话类型为文化间对话提供了可能的样式。     

Nationalist Reframing of the Finnish and Swedish Welfare States – The Nexus of Nationalism and Social Policy in Far‐right Populist Parties

The rise of right‐wing populist parties in the Nordic countries is slowly redefining the Nordic social democratic discourse of the universal and egalitarian welfare state. The nexus of nationalism and social policy has been explored in regions and countries such as Quebec, Scotland, Belgium and the UK, but the change of discourse in the Nordic countries has received less attention. Taking the case of Sweden and Finland, this article argues that Nordic populism does not question the redistributive welfare state per se as many other European neo‐liberal far‐right parties have done. Instead, it reframes the welfare state as being linked to a sovereign and exclusive Swedish and Finnish political community with distinct national boundaries. Although Sweden and Finland largely share a common welfare nation state discourse, the article also points to important differences in the way this discourse is able to frame the welfare nation state where access to, and the design of, social services are no longer universal and egalitarian but based around ethnicity. The article aims to demonstrate this through an analysis of the welfare discourses of two populist parties: Sweden Democrats and True Finns.     

后殖民视野下的民族认同问题——一种后民族主义话语

通过对殖民话语的历史性反思,后殖民主义试图跨越自我与他者之间那段令人不安的距离,建构一种民主的、协商的、更具包容性的后民族主义话语。与排他性的殖民话语不同,它打破了本质论的民族身份观,肯定了各民族国家之间在历史和地理上的混杂性,有利于相互之间的合作与交流。但是,在第三世界的政治实践中,它依然是一种过高的奢望。     

From parental engagement to the engagement of social work services: discussing reductionist and democratic forms of partnership with families

Social work has moved from a child protection discourse towards a child welfare discourse that views the relationship between social workers and families as a partnership. Partnership with families in the field of child protection and child welfare, however, mirrors diverse ideological motives of social policy, civil society and practice. We engage in a theoretical discussion of different interpretations of partnership. We draw a primary distinction between reductionist and democratic forms of partnership with families. In a reductionist approach, social workers activate parents in order to realize the goals set by social work. A democratic approach to partnership refers to a shared responsibility between social workers, parents and children. In this approach, effective partnership is not something to be realized as an outcome, but a point of departure that implies a joint search for meaning and an experiment with which social workers engage. This engagement presents ‘non‐participation’ not as problematic but as an essential element of participation. The focus then shifts from a methodical approach to partnership – how to activate people to participate in the care process – to the question of how the engagement of social workers can be constructed together with families.     

Australian Muslim Responses to the Discourse on Terrorism in the Australian Popular Media

The media is often referred to as a social institution in that it is a major element of contemporary Western society. Through the media, social processes create narratives or stories within interpretative frameworks that are embedded in the cultural and political assumptions of the wider society. Since the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Centre in September 2001, the media has played a crucial role in the developing discourse on contemporary terrorism. In the Australian context, this discourse has emerged as one which implicates Australian Muslims, constructing them as a homogenous monolith with an underlying implication that Islam, and by association Australian Muslims, is secular resistant and at odds with the values of the liberal democratic state. Several textual analyses attest to the bias against Muslims in the popular Australian media discourse. However, there have been no studies into how Australian Muslims are interpreting and responding to this discourse. Based on research into the attitudes and perceptions of the media among Australian Muslims, this paper argues that the interpretation of the media discourse as defiantly anti‐Muslim and the perception of the media as a powerful purveyor of public opinion has impacted on the construction of Australian Muslim identity. In responding to this discourse, Australian Muslims are creating new narratives of belonging which either reinforce or reject the underlying messages that situate them outside mainstream Australia.     

激进民主、对抗性与霸权--拉克劳和墨菲后马克思主义政治规划的批评性解读

作为一种左派话语,拉克劳和墨菲的激进民主政治规划实际上是通过阿尔都塞和拉康等人的"反本质主义"逻辑把客观的"社会"存在改写成一种主观的话语空间而形成的价值立场,在其中政治的对抗性基础变成一种与社会条件无涉的个体对抗,政治本身变成一种霸权斗争(即话语争夺的斗争).正是这一原因,这种政治规划彻底地抛弃了马克思主义的经济基础与上层建筑之分、阶级斗争等核心理论.文章从后马克思主义诞生的直接背景及其理论逻辑解读了马克思主义的这种语言学转向,指出它是西方左派摆脱自身危机的一种伦理突围.     

Social Advocacy for Equal Marriage: The Politics of "Rights" and the Psychology of "Mental Health"

Using the contemporary issue of equal access to marriage for same-sex couples as a case study, we examine two distinctive frameworks within which social advocacy may be pursued. We argue that when we speak as psychologists, we use a discourse of mental health; when we speak as social activists, we use a discourse of human rights and justice. Although these two frameworks may converge in supporting equal access to marriage, they represent radically different ways of understanding inequality and advocating for social change. A discourse of mental health focuses on psychological damage or deficit (caused, for example, by the social exclusion of particular groups or individuals. A discourse of rights asserts universally-applicable principles of equality, justice, freedom, and dignity. Further, the paradigmatic framework of psychology as an approach to understanding human beings in the world seems fundamentally antithetical to the conceptual framework of human rights, as a basis for social justice.     

Challenging East–West value dichotomies and essentialising discourse on culture and social work

All discourse, whether universalistic and/or particularistic, must be subject to contestation, so that we are held accountable for the thinking that we articulate in our writings, and so that we do not reinforce much of the taken for granted assumptions about the world. Critiques such as those of Hutchings and Taylor in this issue of IJSW remind us of social work's commitment to reflexivity and the need to contest discourse that might not be in the interests of particular groups of people. It is not the debate itself contained in the article that is an issue, but the framing of the debate and the assumptions upon which they are predicated. The discourse on human rights within the liberal democratic framework, in a rapidly globalising world characterised by neoliberal capitalism, needs to be critiqued on a global level. Hutchings and Taylor's article assumes the applicability and suitability of liberal democracy for the West and not for the East, with an assumption that the West is characterised by liberalism and the East by tradition and a bureaucratic authoritarianism. It is these assumptions, and the tendency to essentialise Chinese and Western culture and to reinforce the dichotomy between the West and the East, that I contest in this article.     

追求公共善：当代西方对公民责任的研究

公民责任是指公民履行与其公民身份相适应的、符合社会公共善的义务以及对行为后果的承担。当代西方公民责任研究的兴起有历史和现实两方面的原因。历史地看,西方公民理论家无论主张积极的还是消极的公民资格都承认良好的公民素质对于民主制度的建立、稳定和发展是必不可少的,因此都对公民责任持肯定态度。现实原因则既是政治话语自然递进的结果、是民主实践发展的需要也是对过度强调的权利的修正。当代西方对公民责任的研究主要从四方面展开:其一,公民责任是公民维护民主政治的义务;其二,公民责任被视为公民美德的体现;其三,公民的核心责任是政治参与;培养公民责任具有多种途径等等。     

Developing critical social work in theory and in practice: child protection and communicative reason

This paper argues that a critical analysis of the ideologies that inform contemporary child care has been missing from the 're-focusing debate'. Such an analysis points up the necessity of reasserting a critical social work position in order to provide a basis for reconstructing practice and engaging with other social actors and their ideologies in an open and creative fashion compatible with Habermas' aspiration of 'communicative reason'.