{"resolved":true,"match_type":"uuid","source_type":"original_book","book_id":"dfe67541-4039-4f88-87ce-dbbadb056cb2","title":"什么是批判","author":null,"edition":null,"publisher":null,"year":null,"isbn":"9787303287741","requested_by":"printed_page","book":{"source_type":"original_book","book_id":"dfe67541-4039-4f88-87ce-dbbadb056cb2","id":"dfe67541-4039-4f88-87ce-dbbadb056cb2","uuid":"dfe67541-4039-4f88-87ce-dbbadb056cb2","title":"什么是批判","normalized_title":"什么是批判","author":null,"edition":null,"publisher":null,"year":null,"isbn":"9787303287741","isbns":["9787303287741","0120214113"],"parsed":true,"ai_readable":true,"document_type":"book","page_count":490,"navigation_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/ai/book/dfe67541-4039-4f88-87ce-dbbadb056cb2","title_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/ai/title/%E4%BB%80%E4%B9%88%E6%98%AF%E6%89%B9%E5%88%A4","fixed_page_url_template":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/ai/book/dfe67541-4039-4f88-87ce-dbbadb056cb2/page/{printed_page}","path_api_url_template":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/book/dfe67541-4039-4f88-87ce-dbbadb056cb2/page/{printed_page}","read_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/read/dfe67541-4039-4f88-87ce-dbbadb056cb2","page_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/books/dfe67541-4039-4f88-87ce-dbbadb056cb2/page","search_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/books/dfe67541-4039-4f88-87ce-dbbadb056cb2/search"},"page":{"printed_page":141,"pdf_page":161,"physical_index":161,"physical_index_base":0,"printed_page_status":"recognized","page_sha256":"b06ddf913a17d80914f4f6f12a6a1b0647a8f58431f135456d28eb44cfc2c978"},"chapter":"什么是批判","content":"这表明在我对社会批判理论的概念界定中，想象扮演着核心的角色。我的观点是，理论的动力在很大程度上要依赖于关于善好社会的主导性的想法。这种想法应该被理解为某种神话或小说。正如在所有神话和文学虚构那里，这样的想法散发出情感性力量，这种情感性力量同时也是动因性力量。然而，重要的是，这种通过改变社会的行为而起作用的理论的能力伴随着合理性证明的要求。这种要求指的是，关于善好社会的想法应该被置于理性的批判之中。换句话说，我将社会批判理论的动因性力量理解为理性与情感的互动。正是这一点将我的立场与下一立场相区别，后者将理论的动因性力量理解为纯粹理性的。哈贝马斯的社会批判理论似乎可以作为这里的一个例子。②我的立场也不同于另外一种立场。即将理论的动因性力量理解为纯粹情感性的力量，并且很少关注理性化证明的要求。像杰弗里·亚历山大(JeffreyAlexander)的文化社会学正在朝向这一方向；③因此他就处于乔治·索雷尔(Georges Sorel)的传统之中，下面将会澄清这一点。\n\n①我对某种替代性的乌托邦思想的辩护。详见：MaeveCooke, Re-Presenting the Good Society, Cambridge/MA 2006.\n\n② Jürgen Habermas, Theorie des kommunikativen Handelns,2Bände, Frankfurt/M. 1981.\n\n③ Jeffrey Alexander, The Meanings of Social Life: A CulturalSociology, Oxford2003.\n\n朝向社会批判的理性化\n\n141","previous_page":140,"next_page":142}