In a provactive work that brings new tools to the history of philosophy, Karen S. Feldman offers an elegant account of how philosophical language appears to produce the very thing it claims to describe. She demonstrates that conscience can only be described and understood through tropes and figures of langugae. If description in literal terms is impossible, as Binding Words convincingly argues, perhaps there is no such thing. But if the word "conscience" has no tangible referent, then how can conscience be constructed as binding? Does our conscience move us to do things, or is this yet another figure of speech?
Hobbes's Leviathan, Hegel's Phenomenology of Spirit, and Heidegger's Being and Time dramatize conscience's relation to language and knowledge, morality and duty, and ontology. Feldman investigates how, within these works, conscience is described as binding upon us while at the same time asking how texts themselves may be read as binding.
"A brilliant consideration of the relationship between performativity and conscience, Binding Words is a tour de force, written with admirable lucidity, vitality, imagination, and originality. It is at once rhetorical and philosophical, full of vibrant and unexpected readings."
--Judith Butler, University of California, Berkeley
2 有用 Walt 2026-04-03 09:50:41 德国
副标题是“霍布斯,黑格尔,海德格尔哲学中的良知和修辞”。作者主要想围绕katakhrēsis和syllepsis将一些表面上无关的内容拉进她的讨论里,而良知和修辞是最具统合性的要素。第二章是对《精神现象学》中良知和优美灵魂部分的细致讲解和推演,相当精彩,也基本准确,“述行性成功与修辞性失败”的诠释框架还蛮精辟的。熟悉该文段的人(或者哪怕只读过Brandom、Butler的黑格尔现象学诠释的人)都清... 副标题是“霍布斯,黑格尔,海德格尔哲学中的良知和修辞”。作者主要想围绕katakhrēsis和syllepsis将一些表面上无关的内容拉进她的讨论里,而良知和修辞是最具统合性的要素。第二章是对《精神现象学》中良知和优美灵魂部分的细致讲解和推演,相当精彩,也基本准确,“述行性成功与修辞性失败”的诠释框架还蛮精辟的。熟悉该文段的人(或者哪怕只读过Brandom、Butler的黑格尔现象学诠释的人)都清楚,黑格尔在那里对语言异化现象的精彩描述,无论是和上世纪语言哲学(奥斯丁、拉康)还是和更早的左翼理论相比,都不会有丝毫逊色之处,甚至可能更具洞见。这本书算是提供了些许照亮那一节晦涩文本的思路吧,虽然我觉得她还是漏看了一些关键,导致很难解释为何最大程度的异化会带来最高的和解并过渡到宗教章。 (展开)