首页> 外文期刊>Rethinking History >Historiospectography? Sande Cohen on Derrida's Specters of Marx
【24h】

Historiospectography? Sande Cohen on Derrida's Specters of Marx

机译:组织病理学检查?桑迪·科恩(Sande Cohen)论德里达的《马克思的幽灵》

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

In this paper I discuss Sande Cohen's engagements with Specters of Marx, Jacques Derrida's most sustained and significant contribution to historical theory (a term that I take to include historiography and philosophy of history) broadly construed. I begin by asserting Cohen's importance for contemporary historical theory in general and, specifically, all historical theory influenced by Derrida's work and/or concerned with issues of justice. I support this assertion by providing an outline of what I understand to be some of the main themes and emphases of Cohen's critique of historiography and historical culture - a critique that has not been given sufficient attention by most historians and historical theorists. Following a few introductory comments regarding Specters, and a more detailed discussion of the idea of 'the messianic' contained therein, I turn to the specifics of Cohen's critique of the mode of philosophical thinking in that text, linking the points he makes back to the themes and emphases of his position previously described. Cohen's critique takes in a range of concepts found in Specters, such as 'the messianic' and 'haunting/hauntology' as well as Derrida's idea of the 'new scholar': the model historiographer. This essay seeks to explore the reasons why Cohen finds Specters to be a 'deeply problematical' text vis--vis historical theory. However, in keeping with the desire for 'legitimate contentiousness' advocated by Cohen, and whilst acknowledging the brilliance and timeliness (in terms of current developments in contemporary historical theory that draw on Derrida's work) of his engagement with the (Cohen's word) 'historiospectography' he understands Derrida to be advancing, this paper concludes by raising some questions regarding aspects of his criticisms of Specters; a - minor - critique in response to (aspects of) Cohen's critique.
机译:在本文中,我将讨论桑德·科恩(Sande Cohen)与马克思的幽灵的交往,这是雅克·德里达(Jacques Derrida)对历史理论(该词我将包括史学和历史哲学)作出的最持续和最重大的贡献。首先,我要断言科恩对当代历史理论的总体意义,尤其是受德里达的著作影响和/或关注正义问题的所有历史理论的重要性。我通过概述我所理解的是科恩对史学和历史文化的批判的主要主题和重点来支持这一主张,这种批评并未得到大多数历史学家和历史理论家的足够重视。在对幽灵作了一些介绍性评论,并对其中包含的“弥赛亚”概念进行了更详细的讨论后,我将转向科恩对该文本中哲学思维方式的批判的具体内容,并将他的观点与观点联系起来。先前描述的他的职位的主题和重点。科恩的批判吸收了在《幽灵》中发现的一系列概念,例如“弥赛亚”和“困扰/困扰”,以及德里达对“新学者”的想法:典范历史学家。本文试图探究科恩为什么将“幽灵”视为相对于历史理论的“严重问题性”文本的原因。然而,与科恩所倡导的“正当争议”的愿望保持一致,并承认他对(科恩一词)“历史书目学”的参与的辉煌和及时性(就现代历史理论的最新发展而言,借鉴了德里达的著作)。他了解德里达的进步,本文最后提出了一些有关他对“幽灵”的批评方面的问题。对科恩的批评(方面)的一种次要批评。

著录项

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