{"resolved":true,"match_type":"uuid","source_type":"original_book","book_id":"231a69de-8526-4d34-8fa7-231b09af93a8","title":"技术体系：理性的社会生活","author":null,"edition":null,"publisher":null,"year":null,"isbn":"9787552024104","requested_by":"printed_page","book":{"source_type":"original_book","book_id":"231a69de-8526-4d34-8fa7-231b09af93a8","id":"231a69de-8526-4d34-8fa7-231b09af93a8","uuid":"231a69de-8526-4d34-8fa7-231b09af93a8","title":"技术体系：理性的社会生活","normalized_title":"技术体系理性的社会生活","author":null,"edition":null,"publisher":null,"year":null,"isbn":"9787552024104","isbns":["9787552024104"],"parsed":true,"ai_readable":true,"document_type":"book","page_count":328,"navigation_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/ai/book/231a69de-8526-4d34-8fa7-231b09af93a8","title_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/ai/title/%E6%8A%80%E6%9C%AF%E4%BD%93%E7%B3%BB%EF%BC%9A%E7%90%86%E6%80%A7%E7%9A%84%E7%A4%BE%E4%BC%9A%E7%94%9F%E6%B4%BB","fixed_page_url_template":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/ai/book/231a69de-8526-4d34-8fa7-231b09af93a8/page/{printed_page}","path_api_url_template":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/book/231a69de-8526-4d34-8fa7-231b09af93a8/page/{printed_page}","read_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/read/231a69de-8526-4d34-8fa7-231b09af93a8","page_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/books/231a69de-8526-4d34-8fa7-231b09af93a8/page","search_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/books/231a69de-8526-4d34-8fa7-231b09af93a8/search"},"page":{"printed_page":"275 / 190","pdf_page":291,"physical_index":291,"physical_index_base":0,"printed_page_status":"recognized","page_sha256":"7624ffde8f2f2f478eef833ee24559bafa0698dbfa4cdeae1f92aa17b1ae0979"},"chapter":"第七章抗争的逻辑","content":"尽管艾伦对哈贝马斯的纲领作出了批判，但对其中的一个重要方面保留着忠诚：她预先假定了规范性和技术合理性的明确分离。这一假设将批判理论带入主流政治理论的轨道，分享了社会契约论令人难以置信的遗产，即政治源于人们之间的无中介关系。由于政治理论将其技术基础当作外生变量，这就使得不参考技术合理性而讨论规范成为可能。有一种默认的共识是，在制度界定的限度内，无论强加于它们的目标是什么，制度的技术逻辑都能起作用。由于政治理论将界限的界定留给了专家，最终得出了保守的结论。对于由不断受到公众质疑的技术体系所构成的现代社会而言，这是毫无意义的。\n\n被忽视的事实是，进步的障碍不是通常意义上的政治障碍，而是已经被嵌入到技术体系的设计之中。在这种情况下，进步主要是通过技术体系的变迁，而不是民主理论所关注的法律和政策的变革来实现的。把进步的技术条件当作外在的“事实”，掩盖了民主抗争对变革技术基础本身的作用。②\n\n例如，在我写这篇文章时，就考虑到了“黑人生活重要”(the\n\n结论：进步的问题\n\n275\n\n190\n\n① Latour, We Have Never Been Modern.\n\n②David Ingram, Habermas: Introduction and Analysis (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 2010),262-264.","previous_page":290,"next_page":292}