当前位置: X-MOL 学术 › Palgrave Commun. › 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.)
Authoritarianism as pathology of recognition: the sociological substance and actuality of the authoritarian personality
Palgrave Communications Pub Date : 2021-06-04 , DOI: 10.1057/s41599-021-00819-5
Benno Herzog

The rise of the notions of authoritarianism and the authoritarian personality is directly linked to pathologies of early modernity and to social constellations that systematically produce dispositions of character that ultimately form the base of Nazi fascism. The aim of this article, thus, is to explore sociological actuality, i.e., the explanatory power and informative value of the concepts of authoritarianism and the authoritarian personality. Therefore, throughout the article, authoritarianism is framed as a social, i.e., relational approach, similar to that of recognition. However, as authoritarianism does not point towards autonomy, it can be read as a pathology of recognition. The text starts by presenting authoritarianism and authoritarian personality as introduced to the academic debate by early Critical Theory, including a description of the historical and intellectual conditions of the time. It then explores three essential elements of these concepts and how they have changed from then to now; namely, authorities, authoritarian measures, and psychological dispositions used to accept both. The sociological tools thus laid open are then used to respond to current questions about authoritarianism using the example of the impact of experts on crisis discourses. Pointing towards discursive mediation, I ask when and how the need to rely on experts fosters authoritarianism. There are basically two ways of understanding authoritarianism as still present in our society. The first is as a backward-leaning ideology of the good old times. Especially in politics, we can find a wish to overcome complex democratic decision-making procedures with strong, authoritarian leadership. The second form involves understanding authoritarianism not as a personal authority but as a swarm authority in the modern and (digital) panopticon. This pathology of recognition leads to alienated relations with others as mere anonymous providers of evaluations.



中文翻译:

作为承认病理学的威权主义:威权人格的社会学实质和现实

威权主义和威权人格概念的兴起与早期现代性的病态和社会星座直接相关,这些社会星座系统地产生了最终形成纳粹法西斯主义基础的性格倾向。因此,本文的目的是探索社会学的现实性,即威权主义和威权人格概念的解释力和信息价值。因此,在整篇文章中,威权主义被框定为一种类似于承认的社会方法,即关系方法。然而,由于威权主义并不指向自治,它可以被理解为一种病态的承认。文本首先介绍了早期批判理论引入学术辩论的威权主义和威权人格,包括对当时历史和知识状况的描述。然后探讨了这些概念的三个基本要素以及它们从那时到现在的变化;即权威、专制措施和习惯于接受两者的心理倾向。如此开放的社会学工具然后被用来回答当前关于威权主义的问题,以专家对危机话语的影响为例。指向话语调解,我询问何时以及如何需要依赖专家来促进威权主义。基本上有两种方式可以理解我们社会中仍然存在的威权主义。一是作为旧时代落后的意识形态。尤其是在政治上,我们可以找到一种愿望,以强大的、强大的能力来克服复杂的民主决策程序。专制领导。第二种形式涉及将威权主义理解为不是个人权威,而是现代和(数字)全景监狱中的群体权威。这种承认的病态导致与他人疏远的关系,因为他们只是匿名的评估提供者。

更新日期:2021-06-04
down
wechat
bug