• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文学位 >Time and tyranny in Kojeve and Rousseau's 'Emile' (Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Alexandre Kojeve).
【24h】

Time and tyranny in Kojeve and Rousseau's 'Emile' (Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Alexandre Kojeve).

机译：时间和暴政出现在科耶夫和卢梭的《埃米尔》（让·雅克·卢梭，亚历山大·科耶夫）中。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Tyranny has been thought to be a reaction to a stipulated set of events. Kojeve and Rousseau, in contrast, hold that tyranny is in some way deeper, lurking behind as well as within observable events.; The dissertation will explore the cohesiveness of their positions concerning tyranny and time. Chapters 1 and 2 will discuss Kojeve's seminal Introduction a la Lecture de Hegel and the basis of Kojevian human time in the desire for desire, or for recognition. While the tyrant manifests this characteristic par excellence, the tyrant suffers from a central philosophical conundrum the dissertation will style Kojeve's "time-tyrant problem," a problem solved by neither the Kojevian wise man nor the philosopher.; Chapter 3 will posit Rousseau's Emile as taking a path less philosophic, if more deviously political. Rousseau implicates not time but views of time. In contrast to Kojeve, the beneficent tyrant as Emile's governor is not at time's mercy. Rousseau posits that man and citizen cannot "be made at the same time," yet the Chapter will show that man and citizen are obviously fashioned simultaneously in different views of time.; Chapter 4 will show Emile's Sophie as an agent of the governor. She satisfies Emile's natural desires, yet socializes him through the idea of Sophie embodying commitment to duty. However, Sophie as socializing idea fails to produce Emile as man and citizen. This failure is due to differences Emile and Sophie have with respect to the two views of time.; Chapter 5 will place Kojevian philosophy, rather than politics, in the saddle, with the idea of justice, rather than desire for desire, being the organizing principle for society. This final Chapter will show how this leads to the new bourgeois tyrant in Kojevian human time. However, this Chapter will show that the bourgeois tyrant, for all Kojeve's attempts, cannot be squared with Kojevian time phenomenology for want of an intellectual to advise the bourgeois tyrant effectively.; Their times having failed their tyrants and vice versa, Rousseau and Kojeve teach that philosophy is like tyranny. Both demand continued questioning not only of goals, but especially of means.
机译：暴政被认为是对一系列规定事件的反应。相比之下，科耶夫（Kojeve）和卢梭（Rousseau）则认为，暴政在某种程度上更深层次，潜伏在背后以及可观察的事件之内。论文将探讨他们关于暴政和时间的立场的凝聚力。第1章和第2章将讨论科涅夫的开创性著作《黑格尔演讲》以及科希维亚人在渴望或承认的渴望中的时代基础。当暴君表现出卓越的特性时，暴君遭受着一个中心哲学难题的困扰，这篇论文将把科耶夫的“时间暴君问题”定性为一个问题，而这个问题既不是科威夫人也不是哲学家所解决的。第三章将卢梭的《埃米尔》假设为走一条不太哲学的道路，甚至更偏向政治。卢梭所指的不是时间，而是时间的观点。与科耶夫相反，作为埃米尔的州长的仁慈暴君在当时并不宽容。卢梭认为，人与公民不能“同时制造”，但本章将表明，人与公民显然是在不同的时间观中同时形成的。第四章将介绍埃米尔·索菲（Emile's Sophie）作为州长的代理人。她满足了埃米尔（Emile）的自然愿望，但通过索菲（Sophie）体现了对责任的承诺而使他社交。然而，作为社会化思想的索菲未能使埃米尔成为男人和公民。失败的原因是埃米尔和索菲在时间的两种观点上存在分歧。第五章将把正义而不是渴望作为社会的组织原则，而不是把政治放在政治的马鞍上。最后一章将显示这如何导致科威特人时代的新资产阶级暴君。但是，本章将表明，对于所有科耶夫的尝试，资产阶级暴君都不能与科耶夫时代现象学相提并论，因为缺少知识分子来有效地建议资产阶级暴君。卢梭（Rousseau）和科耶夫（Kojeve）经历了暴君统治失败的时代，反之亦然，他们认为哲学就像暴政。两者都要求继续质疑不仅是目标，尤其是手段。

著录项

  • 作者

    Kelly, Gary M.;

  • 作者单位

    Fordham University.;

  • 授予单位 Fordham University.;
  • 学科 Political Science General.; Philosophy.; Law.
  • 学位 Ph.D.
  • 年度 2005
  • 页码 464 p.
  • 总页数 464
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类 政治理论;哲学理论;法律;
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号