查詢結果分析
來源資料
頁籤選單縮合
題 名 | 人文社會科學邏輯基礎的探討--以哈伯瑪斯對「生活世界」的詮釋為解釋線索=The Exploration of the Logical Foundation in Human-Social Science--With Habermas' Interpretation of Life-world as a Clue |
---|---|
作 者 | 曹志成; | 書刊名 | 東吳哲學學報 |
卷 期 | 8 2003.08[民92.08] |
頁 次 | 頁75-123 |
分類號 | 119 |
關鍵詞 | 生活世界; 微觀社會學; 鉅觀社會學; 形式語用學的生活世界概念; 象徵性結構的生活世界概念; Life-world; Micro-sociology; Macro-sociology; The formal pragmatic concept of life-world; The symbolic structure of the life-world concept; |
語 文 | 中文(Chinese) |
中文摘要 | 本文是探討哈伯瑪斯在《溝通行動理論》與《後形上學》二書中如何透過對「生活世界」概念之詮釋來回答「人文社會科學的邏輯基礎如何可能?」,以及「微觀社會學與鉅觀社會學如何連接?」的權宜問題。 本文從比較哈伯瑪斯與舒茲的「生活世界」概念差異,進而提出哈伯瑪斯對「生活世界」概念。就哈伯瑪斯而言,舒茲的「生活世界」概念不免落入「意識哲學」之觀點;再者其「生活世界」概念還是有「文化主義」色彩在其中,必須補充以「社會」向度的「社會整合」與「人格」向度的「社會化」。 哈伯瑪斯以為社會為一種「象徵性結構」的「生活世界」概念,似乎比「形式語用學」的「生活世界」概念更為根本,更能解答「社會秩序如何可能」等問題。換言之,「象徵性結構」的「生活世界」概念是以鉅觀社會學整合微觀社會學的方式進行。 哈伯瑪斯認為「形式語用學」的「生活世界」概念與「象徵性結構」的「生活世界」概念二者在社會科學意涵有異。在「形式語用學」的「生活世界」概念預設「己-物-人」之「隱顯交錯」的關係與潛在資源運用;而在「象徵性結構」的「生活世界」概念則說明行動者「既隱既顯」、「既是主動又是被動」、「既是行動的創立者,也是之前他人行動之結果」的特性。 |
英文摘要 | This paper attempts to use Habermas' interpretation of life-world, which appears in the books "The Theory of Communication Action" and "Post Metaphysical Thinking," to answer the following questions: "How is the logical foundation in the human-social science possible?" and "How to integrate this logical foundation into the micro-sociology and the macro-sociology?" Habermas' and Schutz's interpretations of life-world are compared at the outset of this paper. For Habermas the Schutzian interpretation of life-world remains burdened with the philosophy of consciousness, as well as the color of culturalism, therefore it has to be complemented with the social integration that is in the social dimension as well as the socialization that is in the dimension of personality. Harbermas' understanding of society as a symbolic structure of life-world concept is more essential than the formal pragmatic concept of life-world, and such conception of society is suitable to answer the question such as "How is a social order possible?" In other words, the symbolic structure of life-world concept can be well integrated into the macro-sociology and micro-sociology. Harbermas also sees the difference between the implying contents in the formal pragmatic concept of life-world and the symbolic structure of life-world concept. The former presupposes the interrelationship between the self-object-man and the implicit source utility, whereas the latter explores the aspects of social actors, which includes "the implicit and the explicit relation," "not only a passive but also an active moment of actions," and "both an initiator of new actions and a product of previous action of others." |
本系統中英文摘要資訊取自各篇刊載內容。