当前位置: X-MOL 学术Philosophical Papers › 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.)
Introduction
Philosophical Papers Pub Date : 2018-01-02 , DOI: 10.1080/05568641.2018.1464729
Filippo Contesi 1 , Enrico Terrone 2
Affiliation  

In recent years, increasing attention has been devoted to the underrepresentation, exclusion or outright discrimination experienced by women and members of other visible minority groups in academic philosophy. Much of this debate has focused on the state of contemporary Anglophone philosophy, which is dominated by the tradition of analytic philosophy. Moreover, there is growing interest in academia and society more generally for issues revolving around linguistic justice and linguistic discrimination (sometimes called ‘linguicism’ or ‘languagism’) (see e.g. Van Parijs 2011). Globalization and the increasing adoption of English as global linguistic vehicle or lingua franca push these issues at the forefront of much of the world’s attention. The convergence of these two trends suggests the appropriateness of an analysis of the condition of non-native speakers of English in analytic philosophy. On the one hand, one’s native language can be construed as an unmerited advantage in analytic philosophy, making the language issue similar to, for instance, the case of disability or socioeconomic background. On the other hand, the discipline of analytic philosophy is often described as being characterized by an emphasis on logic and rational argument (which arguably are relatively independent of the particular language of expression), rather than on rhetoric and eloquence (which are less so) (Contessa 2014e). Yet, linguistic fluency (and stylistic eloquence) may in fact be very important factors in analytic philosophy. Philosophy is often seen, for instance in university organization, as a humanities discipline. This makes it stand on the side of literary and artistic disciplines. At the same time, analytic philosophy’s emphasis on logical reasoning and its logico-positivistic roots may Philosophical Papers

中文翻译:

介绍

近年来,人们越来越关注妇女和其他明显的少数群体成员在学术哲学中所占的代表性不足,排斥或直接歧视。这场辩论的大部分焦点都集中在当代英语哲学的现状上,这是由分析哲学的传统所主导的。此外,学术界和社会对围绕语言正义和语言歧视(有时称为“语言论”或“语言论”)的问题越来越感兴趣(参见Van Parijs 2011)。全球化和越来越多地采用英语作为全球语言工具或通用语言使这些问题成为世界上很多人关注的焦点。这两种趋势的趋同表明,分析哲学中分析非英语母语者状况的适当性。一方面,一个人的母语可以被解释为分析哲学中的一项无可争议的优势,这使得该语言问题类似于例如残疾或社会经济背景的情况。另一方面,分析哲学的学科通常被描述为以强调逻辑和理性论证(可以相对独立于特定的表达语言)为重点,而不是强调修辞和口才(后者较少)。 (Contessa 2014e)。然而,语言的流利性(和风格的口才)实际上可能是分析哲学中非常重要的因素。哲学经常被看到,例如在大学组织中,作为人文学科 这使其站在文学和艺术学科的一边。同时,分析哲学对逻辑推理的强调及其逻辑实证主义的根源可能是哲学论文。
更新日期:2018-01-02
down
wechat
bug