%0 Journal Article
%T 后现代主义视域下的深层次分歧
Deep Disagreement from a Postmodernist Perspective
%A 李俊辰
%J Advances in Philosophy
%P 122-127
%@ 2169-2602
%D 2025
%I Hans Publishing
%R 10.12677/acpp.2025.146298
%X 本文以利奥塔的“异识”理论为切入点，在后现代主义视域下重构“深层次分歧”的理论框架。通过批判传统分析哲学将深层次分歧局限于认识论维度的路径(如福格林、普理查德、林奇等学者的共识方案)，本文指出此类分歧的根源不仅在于认知标准的不可通约性，更源于人类语言固有的不完整性、文化多元性及话语类型的异质性。利奥塔提出的“语位体系”与“话语类型”揭示了分歧的本质：当异质语位因缺乏共享链接规则而无法调和时，深层次分歧将超越认知层面，嵌入伦理与政治实践领域，形成不可简化的“异识”。通过分析该隐与亚伯的经典案例，本文进一步论证，传统共识方案试图以单一标准消除分歧的尝试必然导致暴力或压制，而后现代主义的解决路径则强调时间性与动态性，对未来对深层次分歧的解决持乐观态度。最终，研究主张将深层次分歧的解决从认识论维度拓展至伦理政治维度，为后工业时代认知极化与霸权主义问题提供批判性反思路径。
This paper takes Lyotard’s theory of the “differend” as its entry point, reconstructing the theoretical framework of “deep disagreement” from a postmodernist perspective. By critiquing traditional analytic philosophy’s confinement of deep disagreement to the epistemological dimension (as seen in the consensus proposals of scholars such as Fogelin, Pritchard, and Lynch), this study argues that the roots of such disagreements lie not only in the incommensurability of cognitive standards but also in the inherent incompleteness of human language, cultural multiplicity, and the heterogeneity of discourse genres. Lyotard’s concepts of “phrase regimens” and “genres of discourse” reveal the essence of disagreement: when heterogeneous phrase regimens become irreconcilable due to the lack of shared linkage rules, deep disagreements transcend the cognitive realm and embed themselves within ethical-political practices, forming irreducible “differends.” Through an analysis of the classic Cain and Abel narrative, the paper further demonstrates that traditional consensus-driven attempts to eliminate disagreements through singular standards inevitably lead to violence or suppression, whereas the postmodernist approach emphasizes temporality and dynamism, expressing optimism toward resolving deep disagreements in the future. Ultimately, the research advocates expanding the resolution of deep disagreements from the epistemological to the ethical-political dimension, offering a critical counter-perspective on issues of cognitive polarization and hegemonism in the post-industrial era.
%K 深层次分歧，
%K 异识，
%K 语位体系，
%K 话语类型，
%K 后现代主义
Deep Disagreement
%K Differend
%K Phrase Regimens
%K Genres of Discourse
%K Postmodernism
%U http://www.hanspub.org/journal/PaperInformation.aspx?PaperID=117751