【摘要】：本文認(rèn)為施特勞斯的最終意圖乃在于：在反思現(xiàn)代啟蒙運(yùn)動(dòng)的同時(shí)挽救啟蒙的精神,為此他必須通過(guò)政治哲學(xué)史的艱難爬梳,嘗試復(fù)興一種柏拉圖式的古典政治哲學(xué)。 施特勞斯之所以需要這樣做,是因?yàn)樗J(rèn)為在現(xiàn)代啟蒙運(yùn)動(dòng)因其成功而瓦解之后,不僅現(xiàn)代政治哲學(xué)淪為了意識(shí)形態(tài),而且哲學(xué)本身也失去了可能性與必要性,施特勞斯形象地稱這樣一種后現(xiàn)代處境為“第二洞穴”。這個(gè)意識(shí)到自身的“洞穴”本質(zhì)上不適合人類居住,因?yàn)橐环矫嫠狈Ψ�(wěn)固的根基,虛無(wú)主義的疾風(fēng)驟雨從各個(gè)隙縫里鉆進(jìn)來(lái)；另一方面它又給人類戴上了雙重的鎖鏈,使得人類走出洞穴的欲求失去了它的自然根基,人的可能性因而面臨著枯竭的危險(xiǎn)。這就是施特勞斯對(duì)于現(xiàn)代性危機(jī)的獨(dú)特診斷。 而究其原因,施特勞斯認(rèn)為其病根出在現(xiàn)代啟蒙運(yùn)動(dòng)錯(cuò)誤地處理了哲學(xué)與政治之間的關(guān)系,因此這是一種政治哲學(xué)病。自馬基雅維利以來(lái)的現(xiàn)代哲人都不滿足于古典政治哲學(xué)的烏托邦性質(zhì),他們?cè)噲D通過(guò)啟蒙運(yùn)動(dòng)的方式確保哲學(xué)與政治實(shí)現(xiàn)完美的融合,讓真理的光芒照遍政治社會(huì)的每一個(gè)角落。這是一個(gè)何其宏偉而誘人的藍(lán)圖,但是他們?yōu)榇吮仨氉杂X(jué)地降低自己的視野,讓哲學(xué)的啟蒙服務(wù)于政治的改造。這在施特勞斯看來(lái)從一開始就是一個(gè)致命的錯(cuò)誤,因?yàn)樗孟氚褍蓚�(gè)本性上相互排斥的東西強(qiáng)行融合在一起,其結(jié)果只能是兩敗俱傷。施特勞斯通過(guò)一個(gè)著名的“現(xiàn)代性三次浪潮”清晰地展示了現(xiàn)代啟蒙運(yùn)動(dòng)如何因這一內(nèi)在痼疾而一步步走向自我瓦解的末途：盧梭(第二次浪潮)和尼采(第三次浪潮)這兩個(gè)標(biāo)志性人物都因其對(duì)現(xiàn)代啟蒙運(yùn)動(dòng)的道德不滿而將哲學(xué)激進(jìn)化,試圖通過(guò)重返古典來(lái)扭轉(zhuǎn)現(xiàn)代性的墮落趨勢(shì)。但由于他們都沒(méi)能跳出現(xiàn)代啟蒙運(yùn)動(dòng)的固有視野,致使他們非但沒(méi)有遏制現(xiàn)代性痼疾的進(jìn)一步惡化,反倒一步步將現(xiàn)代性推向了頂峰。 為了克服由于現(xiàn)代政治哲學(xué)所導(dǎo)致的現(xiàn)代性危機(jī),施特勞斯認(rèn)為有必要恢復(fù)一種古典的政治哲學(xué)智慧。這種智慧的核心之處即在于認(rèn)識(shí)到哲學(xué)與政治截然不同的本性：哲學(xué)對(duì)于智慧的永無(wú)止境的尋求勢(shì)必威脅到政治對(duì)于意見(jiàn)與教條的依靠,因此就需要一種政治哲學(xué)來(lái)妥善地處理哲學(xué)與政治之間的關(guān)系,使得它們不至于相互危害。這個(gè)意義上的政治哲學(xué)就全然不是一種政治設(shè)計(jì)的方案,甚至柏拉圖的《理想國(guó)》都應(yīng)該看成是對(duì)政治理想主義的尖銳抨擊,它真正試圖彰顯的應(yīng)該是相對(duì)于人的最高可能性而言的政治生活的最高局限性。唯有把握住這樣一種古典智慧,才可能獲得看待人和政治事務(wù)的整全視野,從而才有可能讓這種智慧在今天給予我們啟示。 然而這樣一種意義上的政治哲學(xué)在今天是不可理解的,因?yàn)槲覀兘裉焖吧睢庇谄渲械摹暗诙囱ā币呀?jīng)使得哲學(xué)與政治這兩者都失去了它們?cè)醯暮x。為此,施特勞斯認(rèn)為我們有必要采取一種前人不必要也不會(huì)采用的方法,即政治哲學(xué)史的研究方法,努力從“第二洞穴”倒著爬回到柏拉圖意義上的“第一洞穴”。那是一個(gè)自然的、因而缺乏自我意識(shí)的洞穴,這個(gè)洞穴有著穩(wěn)固的“神學(xué)-政治同盟”作為根基,而哲學(xué)就是在這樣一片土壤之上發(fā)芽成長(zhǎng)的。這個(gè)意義上的哲學(xué)就是對(duì)于城邦的超越,它渴望的是洞穴之外的陽(yáng)光,以及伴隨而來(lái)的與整全合一的人的最高可能性。 當(dāng)然,這必然意味著在后現(xiàn)代處境下不可能有一種原初意義上的哲學(xué)啟蒙,所有這一切都只是一種理論上的嘗試。而它一旦落實(shí)到實(shí)踐層面,它甚至被迫帶上了一層“反啟蒙”的色彩,這是施特勞斯在今天遭受如此之多的非議的重要原因。為此,必須一方面澄清施特勞斯在自由民主制問(wèn)題上的政治立場(chǎng),證明古典政治哲學(xué)如何能夠有所裨益于解決當(dāng)代的政治紛爭(zhēng)；同時(shí),在另一方面必須將它落實(shí)到自由教育或者說(shuō)整全教育問(wèn)題上,它要求我們艱苦細(xì)致地閱讀偉大的經(jīng)典著作,并努力如其所是地理解前人的意圖,以此獲得一個(gè)整全的視野,最終把自已從“第二洞穴”的束縛中解放出來(lái)。 這就是施特勞斯的工作：復(fù)興一種古典政治哲學(xué)的智慧,以應(yīng)對(duì)當(dāng)代政治的與哲學(xué)的危機(jī)。不管我們?nèi)绾卧u(píng)價(jià)施特勞斯(當(dāng)然前提是正確地理解施特勞斯),施特勞斯為我們指明的方向卻都應(yīng)該得到我們足夠的重視。
[Abstract]:This paper holds that Strauss'ultimate intention is to save the spirit of enlightenment while reflecting on the modern enlightenment. Therefore, he must try to revive a kind of Platonic classical political philosophy through a hard struggle in the history of political philosophy.
Strauss needed to do this because he believed that after the collapse of the modern Enlightenment because of its success, not only did modern political philosophy degenerate into ideology, but philosophy itself lost its possibility and necessity. Strauss vividly called such a postmodern situation "the second cave". This awareness of itself. "Cave" is essentially inappropriate for human beings to live in, because on the one hand it lacks a solid foundation, nihilism torrential rains from the cracks drilled in; on the other hand it puts on a double chain for human beings, so that human desire to get out of the cave lost its natural foundation, human possibilities are faced with the danger of exhaustion. This is Strauss's unique diagnosis of the crisis of modernity.
The reason is that Strauss believed that the root of his illness was that the modern Enlightenment mishandled the relationship between philosophy and politics, so it was a political philosophy illness. It is a grand and fascinating blueprint, but they must consciously lower their horizons and allow the Enlightenment of philosophy to serve the transformation of politics. It seems to Strauss that from the beginning it was a fatal mistake because it was illusory. Strauss, through a famous "three waves of modernity," clearly shows how the modern Enlightenment, due to this intrinsic disease, is stepping towards the end of self-disintegration: Rousseau (the second wave) and Nietzsche (the third wave) Both of these iconic figures radically evolved philosophy because of their moral dissatisfaction with the modern Enlightenment, trying to reverse the downward trend of modernity by returning to the classics. But because they failed to jump out of the inherent vision of the modern Enlightenment, they not only failed to curb the further deterioration of the chronic disease of modernity, but went a step further. Stepping to the peak of modernity.
In order to overcome the crisis of modernity caused by modern political philosophy, Strauss believes that it is necessary to restore a kind of classical wisdom of political philosophy. In this sense, political philosophy is not a plan of political design at all. Even Plato's Republic should be seen as a sharp attack on political idealism, and it really attempts to do so. Only by grasping such a classical wisdom can we obtain a comprehensive view of people and political affairs, and thus it is possible for us to learn from this wisdom today.
However, political philosophy in this sense is incomprehensible today, because the "second cave" in which we live today has made both philosophy and politics lose their original meaning. The research method of the history of political philosophy tries to crawl backwards from the "second cave" to the "first cave" in Plato's sense. It is a natural cave which lacks self-consciousness. The cave has a solid "theological-political alliance" as its foundation, and philosophy sprouts and grows on such a soil. Philosophy in its sense is the transcendence of the city-state. It longs for the sunshine outside the cave, and the highest possibility that accompanies the whole person.
Of course, this inevitably means that there can not be an original philosophical enlightenment in the post-modern situation, all of which is only a theoretical attempt, and once it is put into practice, it is even forced to take on a "counter-enlightenment" color, which is an important reason Strauss suffers so much criticism today. For this reason, it is necessary, on the one hand, to clarify Strauss'political stand on the issue of liberal democracy, to prove how classical political philosophy can be useful in resolving contemporary political disputes, and, on the other hand, to put it into practice on the issue of liberal education or holistic education, which requires us to read the great painstakingly and carefully. Classic works, and strive to understand the intentions of predecessors as they are, in order to obtain a complete vision, and ultimately liberate themselves from the shackles of the "second cave".
This is Strauss'job: to revive the wisdom of classical political philosophy in response to the crises of contemporary politics and philosophy.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：浙江大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：博士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2012
【分類號(hào)】：D0

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前9條

1 鄧曉芒;;歐洲虛無(wú)主義及其克服——讀海德格爾《尼采》札記[J];江蘇社會(huì)科學(xué);2008年02期

2 水亦櫟;政治與哲學(xué)——甘陽(yáng)和劉小楓對(duì)斯特勞斯的兩種解讀[J];開放時(shí)代;2004年03期

3 包利民;;“《羅爾斯篇》”與古今之爭(zhēng)的得失——試論斯特勞斯派對(duì)現(xiàn)代性學(xué)問(wèn)的挑戰(zhàn)[J];求是學(xué)刊;2009年01期

4 李強(qiáng);;新保守主義與美國(guó)的全球戰(zhàn)略[J];書城;2003年05期

5 甘陽(yáng);;施特勞斯與美國(guó)保守主義——《政治哲人施特勞斯》后記[J];書城;2003年09期

6 劉小楓;;施特勞斯與中國(guó):古典心性的相逢[J];思想戰(zhàn)線;2009年02期

7 高全喜;;論共和政體[J];中國(guó)政法大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào);2008年04期

8 劉小楓;;施特勞斯與啟蒙哲學(xué)(上)——讀施特勞斯早期文稿《柯亨與邁蒙尼德》[J];西北師大學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2009年03期

9 甘陽(yáng);王欽;;用中國(guó)的方式研究中國(guó)用西方的方式研究西方[J];現(xiàn)代中文學(xué)刊;2009年05期

，

本文編號(hào)：2186483