ABSTRACT

The main aim of this paper is to illustrate the distinctive features of the Finnish school of critical theory, focusing especially on its reception of Axel Honneth’s theory of recognition and his ideas regarding the concept of social pathology. In this respect, the article will provide a concise description of the philosophical work of some of its members: Onni Hirvonen, Heikki Ikäheimo, Arto Laitinen and Arvi Särkelä. The paper consists of seven parts. First, the paper will sketch a very general account of Honneth’s theory of recognition and social life, and, secondly, it will describe the ways the Finnish scholars have reinterpreted Honneth's paradigm of recognition. The third part will discuss two conceptions of social pathology that Honneth has explicitly endorsed in his intellectual career: Christopher Zurn’s idea of pathology as a second-order disorder, and the organicist conception of social pathology, which Honneth himself has put forward in his essay The Diseases of Society: Approaching a Nearly Impossible Concept. Part four and five will then look at how the Finnish theoreticians have discussed and criticized these two conceptions of social pathology that are central in Honneth's work. In part six, the paper will briefly introduce some of the more fundamental criticisms that scholars have aimed at Honneth and, more or less directly, at the Finnish scholars. Finally, the article will explain why the new perspectives of Laitinen, Ikäheimo, Hirvonen, and Särkelä are, in any case, consistent with Honneth's philosophical perspective.

摘要

本文的主要目的是说明芬兰批判理论学派的独特特征，尤其是要接受它对阿克塞尔·霍内斯的认可理论及其关于社会病理学概念的看法。在这方面，本文将简要介绍其一些成员的哲学著作：Onni Hirvonen，HeikkiIkäheimo，Arto Laitinen和ArviSärkelä。本文共分七个部分。首先，本文将概述霍恩斯的承认和社会生活理论，其次，其次将描述芬兰学者重新解释霍恩斯的承认范式的方式。第三部分将讨论Honneth在其学术生涯中明确认可的两种社会病理学概念：社会疾病：接近一个几乎不可能的概念。然后，第四部分和第五部分将研究芬兰理论家如何讨论和批评这两个社会病理学概念，它们是霍内斯著作中的核心。在第六部分中，本文将简要介绍一些学者针对霍尼特（Honneth）或多或少直接针对芬兰学者的基本批评。最后，本文将解释在任何情况下莱蒂宁，伊卡海默，希沃宁和萨凯拉的新观点在任何情况下都与霍内斯的哲学观点一致。