Constituting community: Heidegger, mimesis and critical belonging
Constituting community: Heidegger, mimesis and critical belonging
复制标题
共同体的构成：海德格尔、模仿和批判归属感
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2009
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Louiza Odysseos
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Louiza Odysseos
菲利普·拉库拉巴特在评论马丁·海德格尔的“政治”时指出，海德格尔的思想中存在着一个持续但无法回答的认同问题。与此同时，拉库-拉巴特问道：为什么模仿、认同问题，实际上是“共同体”的问题，不被视为政治本身的基本问题？在这篇文章中，我提出了对社区和模仿问题的思考。我认为，海德格尔对存在的彻底解释学和他律分析（Daseinanalytik）使我们能够批判性地重读他在臭名昭著的《存在与时间》第74段中关于“共同体”和“人民”的神秘、有争议和令人不安的陈述。然而，我的目的不仅仅是对海德格尔的论证进行解释。这种重读主要是检索对社区如何通过海德格尔思想中的“批判模仿”实践而构成的富有成效的理解，正如佩格·伯明翰等作者所发展的那样。我认为，批判性模仿或认同指向了一种与社区过去（“传统”）的关系，这种关系将其成员的社区宪法转化为一种“批判性归属”。批判性归属涉及对传统的批判、置换和抵抗，作为一种质疑的认同模式，帮助我们批判性地理论化超越“厚”和“薄”二分法的社区构成。它还可以很好地帮助我们研究有关社区扩张、多元文化主义和社会排斥的实证问题，这些都是社会和政治关注的前沿问题。
In his commentary on Martin Heidegger’s ‘politics’, Philippe Lacoue‐Labarthe noted that there is a continuous but unanswerable question of identification in Heidegger’s thought. At the same time, Lacoue‐Labarthe asks: why would the problem of mimesis, of identification, indeed, of ‘community’, not be considered the essential question of the political as such? In this article, I propose a consideration of the question of community and mimesis. I suggest that Heidegger’s radically hermeneutic and heteronomous analysis of existence (Daseinanalytik) enables us to give a critical rereading of his cryptic, contentious and troubling statements on ‘community’ and ‘people’ in the infamous paragraph 74 of Being and time. My purpose is not solely exegetical with respect to Heidegger’s argument, however. This rereading is primarily a retrieval of a productive understanding of how community comes to be constituted through the practice of ‘critical mimesis’ from Heidegger’s thought, as developed by authors such as Peg Birmingham. Critical mimesis or identification, I argue, points to a type of relationship towards the community’s past (‘the tradition’) that renders communal constitution by its members into a type of ‘critical belonging’. Critical belonging involves critique, displacement and resistance towards the tradition and, as a questioning mode of identification, help us critically theorise community constitution beyond ‘thick’ and ‘thin’ dichotomies. It may also well aid us in examining empirical questions about the expansion of community, multiculturalism and social exclusion which are at the forefront of social and political concerns.