{"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":29,"pdf_page":49,"physical_index":49,"physical_index_base":0,"printed_page_status":"recognized","page_sha256":"1f42aab5ae713c07ffffc0ca72ada26dde70f830bd0fe148a8ce3ac531ba4644"},"chapter":"什么是批判","content":"社会学中可靠的社会批评具有以下基本形态：社会学通过“观念的-逻辑的”研究重构了成功生活的概念，主体在日常行动中、在(特殊或日常的)决定中、在按部就班的实践中，直接或暗中追随着这些成功生活的概念(更常见的是后者那种不言明的追随)。同时，社会学解释也揭示了那些“构成性的价值观念”，这些基础性的价值观念被社会的核心制度所暗含(也直接出现在很多合法文件中）。例如，市场经济、教育机构或民主制，建立在特殊的价值观、(暗含的)成功生活的构想、对善好的理解之上，一旦离开这些，制度就不能施展其合法的约束力。①因此，真正的社会批评应当是对结构性原因的研究，社会强化了一种引导主体行动的成功生活构想，但这些结构性的原因使得集体(或者特定群体)不能按照这种构想过上相应的美好生活。②\n\n社会学解释当然也可以去说明，社会中具有强势地位的各种理想和构想之间是互不兼容的。不兼容一方面意味着，制度性的“指导原则”(如效率和公平，自由和团结)彼此是不能结合的，因此会在发生摩擦时引起痛苦的经验。但在另一方面，通过一种解构性的或谱系学式的操作，那些成问题的历史性理想得到了澄清，主体意识到这些理想施加在他身上的压迫或暴力，这也揭示出所谓的不兼容性。在主体追求美好生活的过程中，主体感受到不自由、异化或者别的无能为力，现在，主体可能将那些理想指认为这些感受的罪魁祸首。①\n\n① Charles Taylor, Philosophical Papers, 2 Bände, Cambridge/MA 1985,Band 2, oderHartmut Rosa, »Four Levels of Interpretation. A Paradigm for Social Philosophy and Political Criticism«, in: Philosophy and Social Criticism,Jg. 30、2004, S. 691- 720.\n\n②很显然，这很大程度上再次符合一种“交流性的”社会批评，迈克尔·沃尔泽(MichaelWalzer)多次论述了这种社会批评。\n\n时间关系批判\n\n29","previous_page":28,"next_page":30}