权益分类	功能权益	普通用户	{{item.name}}会员
{{category.name}}	{{benefitItem.name}}

The Invention of Consciousness: A French Interpretation of John Locke

意识的发明：约翰·洛克的法国诠释

基本信息

批准号：
AH/J00085X/1
负责人：
Stella Sandford
金额：
$ 3.77万
依托单位：
Kingston University
依托单位国家：
英国
项目类别：
Fellowship
财政年份：
2012
资助国家：
英国
起止时间：
2012 至无数据
项目状态：
已结题

来源：
https://gtr.ukri.org/projects?ref=AH%2FJ00085X%2F1
关键词：
Invention Consciousness French Interpretation John

项目摘要

In 1998, Étienne Balibar, one of the best-known living French philosophers, published a new French translation of Book II, Chapter XXVII of John Locke's Essay Concerning Human Understanding - the chapter added to the second, 1694, edition of Locke's Essay in which is to be found his celebrated theory of personal identity. This is Locke's explanation for what constitutes the identity of the person or of personality, in distinction from the identity of matter, of plants, and of animals, including man. Balibar's long introductory essay to the translation, along with some 31 substantial Glossary entries, propounds and defends a thesis that, if accepted, forces us to reconsider, fundamentally, the philosophical achievement of Locke's famous chapter and to acknowledge Locke's rightful place in the history of European philosophy - specifically in the history of the otherwise mainly Franco-German philosophy of 'the subject'. Balibar's claims run contrary to the received version of the history of philosophy, according to which 'consciousness' is presumed to be at the heart of Descartes' earlier philosophical determination of the 'self', or according to which Descartes 'invented' the philosophical concept of consciousness and thereby presented us with the first philosophy of the subject. Instead, Balibar identifies Locke as the central figure in the invention of the philosophical concept of consciousness in the second half of the 17th century, and in so doing restores to our understanding of the history of philosophy an awareness of the originality, or novelty, of the European invention of 'consciousness', a concept which we are apt to take for granted. However Balibar's work on Locke remains relatively unknown in the English-speaking world, even amongst his admirers. Why is this the case? Balibar's work is part of the tradition of 'continental' or 'Modern European' philosophy, by which is meant the mainly French and German philosophies of the late 18th-20th centuries and the contemporary scholarship across the world that is inspired by it. The dominant contemporary understanding of this tradition, within which Balibar's natural readers reside, effectively excludes Locke from its canon and Balibar's book on Locke therefore seems to have passed under its radar. On the other hand, the English-language literature on Locke is almost exclusively produced within the Anglo-American 'analytical' philosophical tradition, by which is meant the 20th-century, anti-metaphysical tradition of logical and linguistic analysis that conceives philosophy as primarily a process of conceptual clarification and that conceives itself, in part, as the inheritor of the empircist philosophies of Locke and Hume. On the whole, analytical philosophers do not read contemporary French 'continental' philosophy. The publication of an English edition of Balibar's book is an attempt to remedy this situation in relation to both traditions. The contribution of this research is a substantial critical essay for inclusion in the book and general editorial input, adapting the edition for an English-speaking audience.As well as critically assessing Balibar's complex and nuanced arguments, the aim of the research is thus to engage two different readerships in the discipline of philosophy with Balibar's interpretation of Locke. It aims both to introduce Balibar's interpretation to the Anglophone readers of Locke in the analytical tradition, in the context of a wider discussion of Balibar's work on the concept of consciousness and the philosophy of the subject, and to present to readers in the continental tradition Balibar's argument for the outstanding importance of John Locke to the 'continental' philosophy of the subject. In this way the research aims to mediate between the two, sometimes opposed philosophical traditions in demonstrating their common ancestry in Locke andthe value of the contribution of each for the other on this particular topic.

1998年，法国当代最著名的哲学家之一艾蒂安·巴利巴（Étienne Balibar）出版了一本新的法文译本，将约翰·洛克的《人类理解论》（Essay Concerning Human Understanding）第二卷第二十七章（Chapter XXVII）添加到了1694年的第二版洛克的《人类理解论》（Essay）中，洛克著名的人格同一性理论就在这一章中。这是洛克对什么构成了人的同一性或人格的同一性的解释，区别于物质、植物和动物的同一性，包括人。巴利巴尔对翻译的长篇介绍性文章，沿着大约31个实质性的词汇条目，提出并捍卫了一个论点，如果被接受，迫使我们从根本上重新考虑，洛克著名的一章的哲学成就，并承认洛克在欧洲哲学史上的合法地位-特别是在其他主要是法德哲学的历史上的“主体”。巴利巴尔的主张与哲学史的公认版本背道而驰，根据这种版本，“意识”被假定为笛卡尔早期对“自我”的哲学决定的核心，或者根据这种版本，笛卡尔“发明”了意识的哲学概念，从而为我们提供了关于这一主题的第一种哲学。相反，巴利巴尔认为洛克是17世纪下半叶意识哲学概念发明的中心人物，这样做使我们对哲学史的理解恢复了对欧洲发明的“意识”的独创性或新奇的认识，这是一个我们倾向于认为理所当然的概念。然而巴利巴的工作洛克仍然相对未知的英语世界，甚至在他的崇拜者。为什么会这样呢？巴利巴尔的著作属于“大陆”或“现代欧洲”哲学传统的一部分，这一传统主要指18世纪末至20世纪的法国和德国哲学，以及受其启发的当代世界学术。当代对这一传统的主流理解，巴利巴尔的自然读者就居住在其中，有效地排除洛克从其佳能和巴利巴的书洛克因此似乎已通过其雷达。另一方面，关于洛克的英语文献几乎完全是在英美的“分析”哲学传统中产生的，这意味着20世纪的逻辑和语言分析的反形而上学传统，将哲学视为主要是概念澄清的过程，并将自己部分地视为洛克和休谟的哲学家哲学的继承者。总的来说，分析哲学家不读当代法国的“大陆”哲学。出版英文版的巴利巴尔的书是试图纠正这种情况下，有关这两个传统。这项研究的贡献是一个实质性的评论文章，包括在书中和一般编辑输入，调整版本为讲英语的观众，以及批判性地评估巴利巴的复杂和细致入微的论点，研究的目的是因此，从事两个不同的读者在哲学学科与巴利巴的洛克的解释。它的目的是介绍Balibar的解释洛克在分析传统的英语读者，在更广泛的讨论Balibar的工作的概念和哲学的主题，并提出读者在大陆传统Balibar的论点，约翰洛克的突出重要性的“大陆”哲学的主题。通过这种方式，研究的目的是调解这两个，有时反对哲学传统，在洛克和价值的共同祖先证明他们的贡献，为对方在这个特定的话题。