[1]王伟.马克思主义视域中的后现代主义思想批判析论——以伊格尔顿与罗蒂之争为切入点[J].常州大学学报(社会科学版),2023,24(03):77-90.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.2095-042X.2023.03.009]
　Wang Wei.A Critical Analysis of Postmodernism from the Perspective of Marxism: Taking the Dispute between Eagleton and Rorty as the Starting Point[J].Journal of Changzhou University(Social Science Edition),2023,24(03):77-90.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.2095-042X.2023.03.009]
点击复制

马克思主义视域中的后现代主义思想批判析论——以伊格尔顿与罗蒂之争为切入点()
分享到：

常州大学学报(社会科学版)[ISSN:2095-042X/CN:32-1821/C]

卷:
第24卷
期数:
2023年03期
页码:
77-90
栏目:
文史哲研究
出版日期:
2023-07-18

文章信息/Info

Title:
A Critical Analysis of Postmodernism from the Perspective of Marxism: Taking the Dispute between Eagleton and Rorty as the Starting Point
作者:
王伟
Author(s):
Wang Wei
关键词:
罗蒂;  伊格尔顿;  后现代主义;  资本主义;  社会主义
Keywords:
Rorty;  Eagleton;  postmodernism;  capitalism;  socialism
分类号:
I0-02
DOI:
10.3969/j.issn.2095-042X.2023.03.009
文献标志码:
A
摘要:
围绕后现代主义思想,伊格尔顿站在马克思主义立场上,主要从三个方面对罗蒂的新实用主义进行了哲学的与政治的批判。其一,作为后现代主义的美国版本,罗蒂的新实用主义哲学强烈反对形而上学、普遍性等带有本质主义色彩的范畴。伊格尔顿则批评罗蒂激进的认识论难以为诸多伦理、政治问题提供有力辩护,主张不应全面放弃基础与普遍性。其二,罗蒂的新实用主义认为资本主义制度的合理性无须诉诸形而上学的基础,未来的美国应着力塑造自己的共和国形象而非帝国形象。伊格尔顿批评前一路径因破坏了普遍合理性而危机四伏,而后一路径则已被资本主义发展的历史与现实所否定。其三,罗蒂张扬资产阶级自由主义文化、民族中心主义文化,反对社会主义文化、马克思主义文化。伊格尔顿批驳这一美国式的文化是唯意志论文化,集中展现了后现代主义的文化主义做派。上述批判富有洞察力,迄今仍有很强的理论意义与现实意义。对这些批判进行梳理,有益于认清新实用主义哲学服务于美国文明的意识形态真相,坚定马克思主义指导下的社会主义道路自信与文化自信。
Abstract:
Focusing on postmodernism, Eagleton criticizes Rorty's neo-pragmatism philosophically and politically from the standpoint of Marxism in the following three aspects. Firstly, as an American version of postmodernism, Rorty's neo-pragmatic philosophy strongly opposes such essentialism categories as metaphysics and universality. Eagleton criticizes Rorty's radical epistemology for not providing a strong defense for many ethical and political issues, and advocates that foundation and universality should not be completely abandoned. Secondly, Rorty's neo-pragmatism holds that the rationality of the capitalist system should not resort to the metaphysical foundation, and the future United States should focus on shaping its own image as a republic rather than an empire. Eagleton criticizes that the former path was in danger because it destroyed universal rationality, while the latter path has been denied by the history and reality of capitalist development. Thirdly, Rorty advocates bourgeois liberalism culture and ethnocentrism culture, and opposes socialist culture and Marxist culture. Eagleton refutes this American-style culture as a voluntarism culture, which concentrates on the post-modernism culturalism. The above criticism is insightful and still has strong theoretical and practical significance. Sorting out these criticisms is conducive to recognizing the ideological truth that neo-pragmatism philosophy serves American civilization and strengthening the road confidence and cultural confidence of socialism under the guidance of Marxism.

参考文献/References:

[1]RORTY R.Philosophy and social hope [M]. New York:Penguin Books, 1999.
[2]陆扬,王曦,竺莉莉. 文化马克思主义:英法美马克思主义美学研究 [M]. 上海:上海交通大学出版社,2016: 54-58.
[3]王伟.马克思主义视域中的罗蒂与伊格尔顿之争:以意识形态观念为切口[J].福建论坛(人文社会科学版),2021(9):168-180.
[4]段吉方.伊格尔顿的后现代主义文化批判析论[J].天津社会科学,2006(3):32-35.
[5]方珏.走出后现代主义的幻象:论伊格尔顿对后现代主义的解读[J].山东社会科学,2010(1):18-22.
[6]柴焰.抵抗后现代主义与保卫马克思:伊格尔顿的资本主义文化批判[J].山东社会科学,2012(10):42-46.
[7]吴之昕,袁久红.多元文化论、“文化主义”与社会主义共同文化:伊格尔顿对后现代主义文化观念的批判反思[J].南京社会科学,2018(9):55-61.
[8]RORTY R, NYSTROM D, PUCKETT K. Against bosses, against oligarchies: a conversation with Richard Rorty [M]. Chicago: Prickly Paradigm Press, 2002.
[9]EAGLETON T.The illusions of postmodernism [M]. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 1996.
[10]RORTY R. Contingency,irony, and solidarity [M]. NY: Cambridge University Press, 1989.
[11]EAGLETON T.After theory [M]. London: Penguin Books, 2003.
[12]EAGLETON T.The idea of culture [M]. MA: Blackwell Publishing, 2000.
[13]GERAS N. Solidarity in the conversation of humankind: the ungroundable of liberalism of Richard Rorty[M]. London: Verso,1995.
[14]RORTY R, RAGG E P. Worlds or words apart? the consequences of pragmatism for literary studies: an interview with Richard Rorty [J]. Philosophy and literature, 2002, 26(2):369-396.
[15]GUIGNON C, HILEY D R. Richard Rorty [M]. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press, 2003: 152.
[16]马克思恩格斯文集: 第2卷 [M]. 中共中央马克思恩格斯列宁斯大林著作编译局,编译. 北京:人民出版社,2009:690.
[17]马克思恩格斯文集: 第4卷 [M]. 中共中央马克思恩格斯列宁斯大林著作编译局,编译. 北京:人民出版社,2009:194.
[18]泰瑞·伊格顿. 理论之后 [M]. 李尚远,译. 台北:商周出版公司, 2005.
[19]戴维·洛奇.向这一切说再见:评伊格尔顿的《理论之后》[J].王晓群,译.国外理论动态,2006(11):52-56.
[20]理查德·罗蒂. 哲学、文学和政治 [M]. 黄宗英,译. 上海:上海译文出版社,2009.
[21]RORTY R. Achieving our country:leftist thought in twentieth-century America [M]. Cambridge: Harvard University Press,1998.
[22]理查德·罗蒂. 筑就我们的国家:20世纪美国左派思想 [M]. 黄宗英,译. 北京:生活·读书·新知三联书店,2006:128.
[23]罗小青,董荣泼. 自由主义的四大悖论 [J]. 常州大学学报(社会科学版),2022,23(6):100-108.
[24]RORTY R. Objectivity, relativism, and truth [M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991.
[25]EAGLETON T. The contradictions of postmodernism [J]. New literary history, 1997, 28(1): 1-6.
[26]特里·伊格尔顿. 历史中的政治、哲学、爱欲 [M]. 马海良,译.北京:中国社会科学出版社,1999.
[27]孙全胜. 马克思空间政治批判的三重视角 [J]. 常州大学学报(社会科学版),2022,23(1):76-88.
[28]EAGLETON T. Why Marx was right [M]. New Haven & London: Yale University Press, 2011: 7.

备注/Memo

备注/Memo:
作者简介:王伟,文学博士,福建社会科学院文学所研究员。
基金项目:福建社会科学院社会科学规划课题“新实用主义与中国当代阐释学建构研究”(FJSKY52231805)。
更新日期/Last Update: 1900-01-01