ABSTRACT

Axel Honneth deploys the categories of normal and pathological to explain contemporary society in organic terms. This article concerns itself with how these medical references function in Honneth's work to explain the social world, and what their political implications are. For Honneth, social normality is a normative resource, even if it is only accessible through the study of pathology. Socially accepted norms are taken to reflect legitimate principles, with the early Honneth taking pathology as an individual psychic suffering that results from injustice, and the later Honneth taking pathology as an overextension of the logic of one social sphere (e.g. law) into the terrain of another (e.g. ethics). The implications of Honneth's organic account of society are explored through the lens of a competing “French” account of the norm offered by Canguilhem and Foucault. These French thinkers view socially accepted norms not as reflecting legitimate principles, but as standardizing processes of normalization that stifle normativities that do not conform. It is suggested that Honneth's account of normativity must be articulated with Canguilhem's and Foucault's account of normalization. That said, through the course of the analysis, several unexpected continuities are discovered between these two different traditions.

摘要

Axel Honneth运用正常和病理学的类别来有机地解释当代社会。本文关注这些医学参考文献在Honneth的工作中如何解释社会世界，以及它们的政治含义是什么。对于Honneth来说，社会常态性是一种规范性资源，即使只有通过病理学研究才能获得。社会公认的规范被认为是反映合法原则的方法，早期的Honneth将病理学视为因不公正而造成的个人心理痛苦，而后来的Honneth则将病理学视为一个社会领域（例如法律）逻辑的过度延伸。另一个（例如道德）。霍内斯（Honneth）的含义 通过Canguilhem和Foucault提供的规范的“法国”竞争性叙述，探索了社会的有机叙述。这些法国思想家认为，社会认可的规范不是在反映合法原则，而是在规范化标准化过程，以扼杀不符合规范的规范。建议Honneth的规范性说明必须与Canguilhem和Foucoault的规范化说明清楚。就是说，通过分析的过程，在这两种不同的传统之间发现了一些意想不到的连续性。规范性的说明必须与Canguilhem和Foucault的规范化说明清楚。就是说，通过分析的过程，在这两种不同的传统之间发现了一些意想不到的连续性。规范性的说明必须与Canguilhem和Foucault的规范化说明清楚。就是说，通过分析的过程，在这两种不同的传统之间发现了一些意想不到的连续性。