Refine
Document Type
- Articles (140)
- Dissertations (48)
- Books (10)
- Collections (6)
- eBook (1)
- Forewords (1)
Has Fulltext
- no (206) (remove)
Year of publication
- 2020 (206) (remove)
Revisiting Authoritarianism
(2020)
This article traces the roots of the Authoritarian Personality (AP) project in the neo-Freudian/phenomenological tradition of the Frankfurt School (FS). It focuses on three of its major proponents (Erich Fromm, Theodor Adorno and Herbert Marcuse) and examines the construction of the F-scale. It outlines how, according to FS-influenced scholars, the AP arose from the disciplinary measures inflicted on late 19th and early 20th century German middle-class youth, and details the sado-masochistic political style of the prototypical AP. It covers the critical reception of this characterization and explanation of authoritarianism by Bob Altemeyer and Anglo-American positivism. It concludes by arguing that in overlooking the inner life of the AP, positivism blinds us to compelling truths, about authoritarianism, and also about ourselves.
In Zeiten zunehmender psychischer Erkrankungen soll sich in vorliegender Arbeit mit den Ansichten Erich Fromms auseinandergesetzt werden und deren Aktualität für die gegenwärtige praktische Ausführung der Sozialen Arbeit.
Das Ziel der Arbeit bildet die Ausschau neuer Möglichkeiten Sozialer Arbeit, zur Neugestaltung der Makro-, Meso- und Mikroebene, um politisch aktiv zu werden, die Gesellschaft neu zu formen, dabei an der Wurzel des Geschehens anpacken zu können und sich als Disziplin weiterhin zu professionalisieren. Am Ende der Arbeit soll ein Resümee bezüglich der Aktualität Fromms im Kontext der Sozialen Arbeit gezogen werden. [Lehmanns.de]
Wer von Erich Fromm nur >Die Kunst des Liebens<und >Haben oder Sein< kennt, weiß nur wenig von den Quellen, aus denen sich sein Denken speist. Beide Bücher sind für ein großes Publikum geschrieben. In beiden geht es um Kulturkritik: darum, dass die Art und Weise, wie wir unser gesellschaftliches Zusammenleben auf Wettbewerb und Profitmaximierung gründen, den Einzelnen und damit die Gesellschaft als Ganzes krank macht; aber auch darum, Alternativen aufzuzeigen, wie man sich in einer verrückt gewordenen Welt eine auf Liebe und schöpferische Kreativität gegründete Menschlichkeit bewahren kann.
乔伊斯·卡罗尔·欧茨是美国著名女作家,她一生致力于文学创作和研究,其发表的小说曾一度在社会中引起了巨大的反响,她的小说作品大多扎根于美国现实社会,从基本的人性着手,深入至人物的内心世界,对人物的心理活动进行细腻的描写,从而对美国的社会现实中存在的问题进行揭示与批判,表达出欧茨对社会与人性的独特见解。本论文以弗洛姆的社会性格理论为支撑,通过分析欧茨作品中的人物性格特点,结合文本的社会背景和弗洛姆理论找出病态社会性格形成的深层次原因,最后寻求解决的途径。欧茨擅长描写人物的心理活动,以此展现出人物的性格特征。通过分析其小说,能够发现小说中人物的性格都存在着不健康的成分,盲目接受外界的声音而忽略自我内心的真实意志;采取剥削的手段向外界索取一切事物,成为剥削者或被剥削者;对于生活保守而消极。笔者从美国社会、家庭和个人三方面对这些病态社会性格的类型进行了详细分析,糟糕的社会环境、冷漠而疏离的家庭关系以及个人复杂的心理活动都是造成病态社会性格形成的原因。文学作品最终都要对个体进行一定的关怀,为了寻求幸福的途径,建构健康的性格类型,个人要利用自己的理性建立一个独立的人格,用一颗充满>爱<的心去对待身边的一切事物,而从社会层面来说,政治、经济、文化的改变不可或缺。欧茨通过不断的小说创作,旨在揭示出美国人的生存现状,不断地寻求实现独立人格和追求幸福的途径。
硕士约翰·厄普代克(1932-2009)作为二十世纪中后期美国最优秀的小说家之一,致力于描写美国中产阶级的生活状况。他的代表作>兔子四部曲<详细描绘了美国社会从二十世纪五十年代至九十年代的发展变迁,揭露了人们在社会不同发展阶段的生活状态。四部小说每一部可独立成篇,以哈利的人生经历为中心刻画了约150个人物形象。哈利作为这一系列的主人公,展现出典型的美国中产阶层的思维方式和行为表现。论文旨在用艾瑞克·弗洛姆(1900-1980)的人本主义理论解读兔子哈利的人物形象。弗洛姆作为德国的心理学家和社会学家主要对人的问题进行研究,通过借鉴马克思主义和弗洛伊德学说形成了特有的人本主义理论。他将人的问题与社会现象结合起来,阐释了人们正面临着自由导致的焦虑和异化带来的自我价值丧失,分析了社会心理层面上人的性格并提出了成为健全的人与构建健全社会的解决方法。论文主要通过弗洛姆的人本主义理论从性格特征和行为表现两方面分析哈利的人物形象。一方面,采用弗洛姆的性格理论分析哈利在成为中产阶级前后受异化影响产生的不同社会性格特征,阐述了在社会异化引发的不同性格特征下哈利心理上的变化和他与身边亲人朋友交往时的内在表现。另一方面,论文结合弗洛姆提出的自由与异化两大困境对哈利面对生活出现的矛盾时做出的行为表现进行分析,阐述在不同的社会性格倾向影响下,哈利在追寻自由与自我价值的过程中面临的挑战与转变。运用弗洛姆的人本主义理论分析兔子哈利的人物形象是>兔子四部曲<研究的一个新视角。通过对兔子哈利的性格与行为特征的分析,论文进一步论述了现代西方人与社会面临的异化问题。哈利在异化环境下所处的困境与他在追寻自由中面临的迷茫,与现代西方社会各个阶层在异化影响下面临的挑战相对应。除此外论文也对异化环境下人与自我,人与人,人与社会之间的联系以及人的生产性问题进行了思考。
Fromm is one of the well-known .humanistic ethicists. His whole life had focused on people. In his view, loving is an art that can guide people to better survive and promote liberation. The existing researches on the ethical thought of loving mainly revolve around his theory of love and his practice of love, while relatively few studies are conducted from the perspective of overall humanistic ethics. It would help us, investigating his ethical thought of love into a humanistic perspective of ethics, so this paper attempts to grasp the ethical thought of love and its ideological implication with comprehensively. The tradition of Judaism love planted the seeds of loving in Fromm’s heart, while the difference of Johann Jakob Bachofen’s parental love inspires him to extend love from family to society, and Zen’s enlightenment method and Freud’s psychoanalytic theory helped him cast his psychological basis, Marx’s theory of humans and the critical theory of Frankfurt School provided him with theoretical weapons to criticize the abnormal phenomena of human being and society. Thanks to these theoretical basis from the great thinkers and schools, Fromm put forward his own theory on people, setting out a logical kick-off for his discourse on ethics of love. Fromm highlighted that loving was the answer to human existence. He underwent explorations of human survival dilemma and spiritual needs, approached a >prescription< that rooted in human beings, and prescribed his medication->recipe for love< involving both theory and practice, in which >giving< is the heart of love, and >caring about oneself<, >knowing oneself<, >respecting oneself<, >taking responsibility for oneself< treated respectively as motivation, prerequisite, necessary condition and fruits, forming the basic substances of his loving. When facing different practitioners, Fromm also called their differences. The general and specific requirements of the art of loving constituted his practicing of love. Fromm believed that only a combination of the two requirements could achieve the ethical goal of self-love and of a healthy society. First of all, the people who acts >self-love< is the ideal >moral newcomer<. He must have a productive character in this way, maintain independence as well as be integrated with others in the process of >assimilation< and >socialization<. Also, he should have good interpersonal relationships, and be able to cultivate a way of survival that emphasizes existence instead of possession, so as to realize the all-round development of people. Second, a healthy society, from Fromm’s perspective, was not only the prerequisite for real love, but also the goal of love of ethics. Fromm did not only carry out ethical criticism of various fields of society, but tried to present reform plans also. He made attempts to save people and restore human nature, and love was one of his criteria and conditions for measuring and achieving goals. In addition, Fromm’s love of ethics was not only a critique of authoritarian ethics or a supplement to scientism ethics, and it’s good for us to view the development of capitalism objectively. At the same time, this Paper is based on the reality of our country, trying to explore the beneficial factors for individual liberation and social development, in order to approach its realistic value. As could be seen, these values cannot erase the limitations of Fromm’s love of ethics, his utopian nature, the bias of the individual and the fragility of the theory of human nature, etc. up to a point, all of which had blocked his ethical purpose from realizing. [Translation: www.cnki.net, 4/2023]
This paper criticizes the emphasis placed by contemporary social theory and political philosophy on institutionalism as the basis for the understanding, legitimation and changing of institutions, or social systems, and society as a whole. The more impactful characteristic of institutionalism is its technical-logical structuring, based on an impartial, neutral and formal proceduralism that autonomizes social systems in relation to political praxis and social normativity, depoliticizing these social systems. Here, they are no longer depoliticized, but assume political centrality as the fundamental social subjects of the legitimation and evolution of institutions and society. The paper’s central argument is that it is necessary to re-politicize the institutions and the social subjects or social classes in order to ground and streamline a direct political praxis and the civil society’s social-political subjects as the basis for framing and legitimizing the current process of Western modernization. Recovering the politicity and the carnality of institutions, of social classes and of the evolution of society, is the fundamental task for a contemporary critical social theory that faces the strong institutionalism based on systemic theory. Such politicization is the unforgettable teaching of Karl Marx and Erich Fromm: the institutions have political content and political subjects, they are the result of social struggles for hegemony between opposed social classes which are political. Now, such politicity-carnality must be unveiled and used for an emancipatory democratic political praxis as the route for social analysis and political change, in opposition to the technical-logical understanding both of the institutions and of the social subjects.
伍绮诗是美国新兴华裔女作家,《小小小小的火》是她继《无声告白》在文坛大火之后的最新作品。小说着眼于两个美国家庭,讲述了理查德森一家与米娅和她的女儿的相处以及发生的激烈碰撞。伍绮诗通过讲述她们不同的生活以及她们间的碰撞,深刻地揭露了美国社会里一些人病态与冷漠的异化状态。本文以弗洛姆的异化理论为指导,从人与自我的异化、人与人的异化和人与社会的异化三方面解析《小小小小的火》中的人物在生活中遭遇的异化困境,并通过揭示普遍的异化现象进一步探讨小说中异化的救赎方式。首先,人与自我产生了异化。人们受到社会规范的影响,压抑甚至失去自我主体性。通过创造性的活动与成熟的母爱,她们能坚定自我想法并找回最初的自我,从而实现自我异化的消解。其次,人与人之间也存在着异化现象。在现代社会中,为了各自的利益和成功,友情变得不再纯粹和无私。恋人因单纯地从自己的角度考虑问题而产生了误解。纯粹和深刻的关系需要成熟的爱。成熟的爱使人们彼此尊重和理解,继而帮助人们摆脱异化关系。最后,异化还渗入到了人与社会的关系之中。这种异化主要是有高消费观和一致化的社会文化造成的。高消费让人们失去了理性。一致的生活模式使得人们的生活单调且没有个性。通过建立一个健全的社会,人们能够树立健康的消费观以及拥有多样的文化生活方式,从而消解与社会的异化。通过对《小小小小的火》中异化现象和异化的救赎方式的探讨,本文尝试着为现代人的生存提供一些经验与教训。当人们处于异化状态时,他们应采取积极地方式将自己从异化之中拯救出来,并学会以创造性、爱和人道主义的方式与自我、他人及社会健康地相处。
马克思异化批判思想已成为20世纪人类历史和人类文明的一种自觉的自我批判意识,为众多当代理论家所关注和运用。其中西方马克思主义和东欧新马克思主义理论家最为突出,他们不仅系统阐述了马克思的异化思想,深刻揭示了现代社会的普遍异化,而且还特别彰显了自我异化批判的理论价值和现实意义。马尔库塞、弗洛姆等西方马克思主义理论家通过对异化的心理机制和性格结构的现实批判而对现代人的深层自我异化做了初步探索;彼得洛维奇、沙夫等东欧新马克思主义理论家则在自我异化的理论阐释和现代人生存悖论的现实批判两个基本层面对人的自我异化做了更为深入和全面的研究。这些探讨对于更加深刻揭示当代人类文明困境和人的生存的内在矛盾性,更加合理地推动社会发展具有重要的价值。