2006/01/19
mMK~敏感聯想的界線劃清
{又是遲些才答自身的當刻關懷有幾霸道,但友人關於fascist的聯想,我總是覺得跟(極右)民粹一起談對板過functionalistic(頗左)的指責,反而對於這所觸動的敏感神經,我認同Michael Newman從藝評看藝術史看藝評看藝術史,以為內裡可能大有文章.}(photo: the Schmitt bk I bought from Boston MIT Press bkshop carries this discount price tag with "MIT PRESS HURT")
這裡不過是承接上兩個entries,從sign & sight中抽了一段論施米特(Carl Schmitt)的短文來替熱身再加加溫(卻絕無意攀附,更何況當中所包含對fascist的依附!施米特這被喻為(不又是被"煲"成?)"納粹主義的哲學教父"(其實際介入倒遠多於同得此銜的尼采),其對於議會民主(議會主義 / Parlamentarismus)的批評,倒是值得我們去認真思考,尤其又是從"當刻關懷"出發).
Controversial German thinker Carl Schmitt (1888-1985) is famed for his pithy formulas: "Sovereignty belongs to those who determine the state of emergency", "True politics is the differentiation of friend and enemy," and "All key concepts in modern political science are secularised theological ones." Herfried Münkler, professor of political science at Berlin's Humboldt University, defends the philosopher against his critics and his admirers.
"Schmitt is a stylistic extremist. And this stylistic device has a counterpart in his political thought, when he ascribes greater cognitive value to the state of emergency than most others do. The majority likes to be in the middle. Knowledge, by contrast, develops on the margins. If you hold such a belief, you have to phrase your words accordingly, and Schmitt did so masterfully. More than almost any other thinker, Schmitt used linguistic precision to make an enigma of himself."
Münkler comments on Schmitt's much criticised "decisionism": "Some argue that Schmitt's 'decisionsim' theory inevitably pushes him into the arms of National Socialism. But in fact this is anything but self-evident. If there was any act in Germany after 1933 that needed a decision, it was resistance to Hitler. By contrast, not taking a decision led to tacit support."
- Die Welt, 07.04.2005
