原创翻译:龙腾网 http://www.ltaaa.com 翻译:yzy86 转载请注明出处



(图解:一张1870年的荷兰讽刺漫画)

(作者为伦敦大学皇家霍洛威学院,现代欧洲哲学讲师丹尼尔·惠斯勒)

Nationalist politics continue to gain support across the European continent, from the UK to Italy, France, Hungary and Poland. Meanwhile, the concept of “Europe” has become a rallying cry for those who want to resist what they see as a constraining, inadequate or conservative vision for the future.

从英国到意大利,法国,匈牙利,波兰,民族主义政治继续在整个欧陆获得支持。于此同时,“欧洲”这个概念对于那些抗拒他们眼中那个受限制、各方面呈现不足或保守的未来前景的人来说,已经成为了战斗口号。

Whatever else such a political picture may call to mind, it’s also a descxtion of the state of philosophy across Europe in the early 19th century. During the 1830s and 1840s, nationalism and Europeanism stood for two sides in a struggle over the identity of philosophy itself. For the nationalists, Europe was an insult to be resisted. But for others, it came to represent a positive ideal for transnational collaboration and communication. And these debates still resonate in discussions of Europe today.

无论这样一种政治图景可能会让人回想起什么别的东西,它也是对19世纪初全欧哲学(发展)状况的一种描摹。在1830年代和1840年代,民族主义和欧洲(联合)主义代表了哲学自身的身份之争中的两个方面。对于民族主义者来说,欧洲(这个概念)就是一种侮辱,是需要去抵抗的东西。但对其他人来说,它代表了跨国合作与交流的积极理想。而在当今对欧洲的讨论中,这些辩论仍能引发共鸣。



Yet, by 1834, this nationalist model for different communities of thought had come under attack, for instance by Joseph Willm, an Alsatian philosopher stuck between the French and German traditions. He lamented in an essay on “The Nationality of Philosophies” that these national stereotypes stood in the way of the production of good philosophy. He wrote: “Never has there been less of a European philosophy.”

然而,到了1834年,这种针对不同思想群体的民族主义模式遭受了抨击,例如哲学家约瑟夫·维姆,这位阿尔萨斯人就陷在法国和德国传统中间动弹不得。他在一篇名为《哲学的国籍》的随笔中哀叹,这些针对各国的刻板印象妨碍了好的哲学的产生。他写道,“欧洲哲学从未如此式微过。”

A ‘continental’ philosophy

一种“大陆”哲学

Willm went on to bemoan the lack of a common language that had served as the glue between intellectuals from around the continent in previous eras. It was this lack of a European philosophy, he continued, that meant: “The more national a philosophy, the narrower, more incomplete and thus further from the truth it is.”

接着,维姆惋惜于缺乏一种通用语言,在过去的时代里,这种语言在欧陆各地知识分子之间起到了粘合剂的作用。他继续说道,这正是由于缺少一种欧洲哲学,也就是说:“一种哲学越是民族,就越是狭隘,越是残缺,因此也就离真理越远。”

But he saw hope in the blossoming relationship of two of the most celebrated and politically powerful philosophers of the period, the Frenchman Victor Cousin and German Friedrich Schelling. They corresponded on the possibility of a European rapprochement, one that would intellectually reproduce the kind of international dominance that, 20 years earlier, Napoleon had attempted to create through military might.

但是,他在那个时代最有名望且在政治上最有权势的两位哲学家,法国人维克多·科曾和德国人弗里德里希·舍林间发展出的成功关系中看到了希望。他们在通信中探讨欧洲重归于好的可能性,后者将在思想层面重现拿破仑在二十年前企图通过军事实力打造的国际主导地位。

Similar ideas emerged during the 1840s among left-wing radicals looking for international co-operation as a means to prepare for a coming revolution – which eventually erupted in 1848 across the continent.

在1840年代,在左翼激进分子中涌现出了类似的思想,他们以寻求国际间合作为手段,为即将到来的革命做准备,后者最终于1848年在整个欧陆爆发。



(图解:革命的时代:1848年,巴黎苏福洛路上的街垒)

In this vein, Louis Blanc, a French radical journalist who was to go on to become a member of the government of France’s Third Republic, wrote a treatise in 1843 arguing for an intellectual alliance between radical thinkers in France and Germany. Arnold Ruge, a former collaborator of the philosopher Karl Marx, responded to this treatise with another pamphlet renewing the call for European collaborations to bring about a revolution. Similar positive uses of the concept of Europe emerged among Czech philosophers, such as Bernard Bolzano, Ignác Hanuš and Augustin Smetana.

在这方面,法国激进记者路易·布兰克,之后他成为了法兰西第三共和国政府的一员,在1843年写了一篇论文,支持在法国和德国的激进思想家之间建立思想联盟。哲学家卡尔·马克思的前合作者阿诺德·鲁格,用另一本小册子对该论文作出了回应,为了引发一场革命,他重新呼吁欧洲展开合作。在诸如伯纳德·博尔扎诺,伊格纳克·哈努斯和奥古斯丁·斯梅塔那等捷克哲学家中间,也出现了类似的对欧洲这个概念的正面使用。

Retreating back to national stereotypes

退回到国家刻板印象

Philosophers throughout this period sometimes represented themselves as French or British, or as European. And sometimes, they ambivalently flitted between the two and thought of themselves as both. For instance, in 1833, Cousin had an enthusiasm for Europe, encapsulated in his claim that:
There is nothing to fear from contact with philosophical schools that flourish in other parts of this great European family.



In the end, the nationalism of the early 19th century didn’t just define the self-image of many a philosopher of a bygone era, but continues to determine how we think today about the geopolitics of thought. In particular, it shapes our collective failure to understand the ways in which our ideas and thinking are shaped by a European heritage. What we think and how we think it are not only determined by nationalist stereotypes. They also come by way of shared ideals and practices born out of a common European past that has gone on to shape the politics and institutions of today’s Europe.

到头来,十九世纪初的民族主义不仅定义了一个已经过去的时代中众多哲学家的自我形象,而且还继续决定着今天的我们对思想领域地缘政治的看法。特别是,它招致了我们在理解欧洲传统对我们理念和思维的塑造方式时的集体失败。我们之所想以及我们的思维方式 不仅取决于民族主义者的刻板印象。其由来也是通过共同的理想和做派,而这些理想和做派脱胎于一个共同的欧洲的过去,后者继续塑造着当今欧洲的政治和体制。