{"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":294,"pdf_page":310,"physical_index":310,"physical_index_base":0,"printed_page_status":"recognized","page_sha256":"d3542eeba3e58c0f89a17a038a4fcae9907e6f0b40c7600e579efe7503ea02c5"},"chapter":"第七章抗争的逻辑","content":"康德不愿意给启蒙任何限制。面对那些主张某些阶层的人尚未“成熟”到享有自由的人，他回应道，“除非我们已有自由，否则我们不能成熟到这种自由我们必须是自由的，以便自由地运用我们的能力；而且除非通过我们自己地努力，我们不可能在理性上成熟，而这仅仅当我们是自由时才能做到。”②这就是技术体系中抗争的故事。\n\n工具化理论为建构批判主义提供了方法论基础，不仅可作为一种装置与体系的分析工具，而且可成为理解技术体系的规范性的变革一条进路。依照哈贝马斯的构想，规范有效性已经被确认为程序有效性，而进步也是由争议中的实质性价值来衡量的。\n\n技术体系不是普通的实证研究对象，而是我们存在的框架。就像康德所要求的那样，它基于一种特定的生命观念一种我们不可避免地要采取的立场，不论它是有意识地还是明确地，或被动地服从的无可争辩的事实。①进步不是技术上或道德上的，而是技术上和道德上的。人不能由技术所主张的征服自然或由哲学所主张的权利跨越这一二元结构。在一个以技术合理性为基础的社会中，超越的过程本身必须有一个合理的结构它必须在技术上有意义，就像技术变革必须在道德上有意义一样。\n\n203\n\n294\n\n技术体系：理性的社会生活\n\n① Kant, \"What Is Enlightenment?,\" 1.\n\n② 引自 Hannah Arendt, Lectures on Kant's Political Philosophy (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1982) ,48. The source is Immanual Kant, Religion within the Limits of Reason Alone, trans. T, M. Greene and H. H. Hudson (New York: Harper Torchbooks, 1960),176-177 (note).","previous_page":293,"next_page":295}