当前位置: X-MOL 学术History of the Human Sciences › 论文详情
Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)
On Kuhn’s case, and Piaget’s: A critical two-sited hauntology (or, On impact without reference)
History of the Human Sciences ( IF 0.9 ) Pub Date : 2020-07-02 , DOI: 10.1177/0952695120911576
Jeremy Trevelyan Burman 1
Affiliation  

Picking up on John Forrester’s (1949–2015) disclosure that he felt ‘haunted’ by the suspicion that Thomas Kuhn’s (1922–96) interests had become his own, this essay complexifies our understanding of both of their legacies by presenting two sites for that haunting. The first is located by engaging Forrester’s argument that the connection between Kuhn and psychoanalysis was direct. (This was the supposed source of his historiographical method: ‘climbing into other people’s heads’.) However, recent archival discoveries suggest that that is incorrect. Instead, Kuhn’s influence in this regard was Jean Piaget (1896–1980). And it is Piaget’s thinking that was influenced directly by psychoanalysis. Psychoanalysis then haunts Kuhn’s thinking through Piaget, and thus Piaget haunts Forrester through Kuhn. To better understand this second site of the haunting—which is ultimately the more important one, given the intent of this special issue—Piaget’s early psychoanalytic ideas are uncovered through their interaction with his early biology and subsequent turn to philosophy. But several layers of conflicting contemporary misunderstandings are first excavated. The method of hauntology is also developed, taking advantage of its origins as a critical response to the psychoanalytic discourse. As a result of adopting this approach, a larger than usual number of primary sources have been unearthed and presented as evidence (including new translations from French originals). Where those influences have continued to have an impact, but their sources forgotten, they have thus been returned. They can then all be considered together in deriving new perspectives of Forrester’s cases/Kuhn’s exemplars/Piaget’s stages.

中文翻译:

关于库恩的案例和皮亚杰的案例:一个关键的两处鬼魂学(或者,关于没有参考的影响)

John Forrester (1949–2015) 披露说他对 Thomas Kuhn (1922–96) 的兴趣已成为他自己的兴趣感到“困扰”,这篇文章通过为此提供两个网站,使我们对他们的遗产的理解更加复杂令人难以忘怀。第一个是通过使用 Forrester 的论点来定位的,即库恩和精神分析之间的联系是直接的。(这是他的史学方法的假定来源:“爬进别人的脑袋”。)然而,最近的档案发现表明这是不正确的。相反,库恩在这方面的影响是让·皮亚杰(Jean Piaget,1896-1980)。皮亚杰的思想直接受到精神分析的影响。然后精神分析通过皮亚杰困扰着库恩的思想,因此皮亚杰通过库恩困扰着福雷斯特。为了更好地理解困扰的第二个地点——考虑到本期特刊的意图,这最终是更重要的一个地点——皮亚杰的早期精神分析思想通过与他早期生物学的相互作用以及随后转向哲学而被揭示。但首先要挖掘出几层相互矛盾的当代误解。鬼魂学的方法也得到了发展,利用其起源作为对精神分析话语的批判性回应。采用这种方法的结果是,出土并提供了比平常更多的主要来源作为证据(包括来自法文原件的新译本)。那些影响继续产生影响,但它们的来源被遗忘的地方,它们因此被退回。
更新日期:2020-07-02
down
wechat
bug