What We Talk about When We Talk about Political Theory: Reconsidering Hannah Arendt's ＂Method＂ of Political Thinking and Its Critiques of the Rawlsian Method of Political Philosophy Today

當我們談論政治理論時我們在談什麼？再探漢娜．鄂蘭的政治理論「方法」以及其對於當今羅爾斯式政治哲學方法的批判

10.6683/TPSR.202112_25(2).0005

杜坤峰(Kun-Feng Tu)

Hannah Arendt ； John Rawls ； Methodology ； Political Theory ； Thinking ； 漢娜．鄂蘭 ； 約翰．羅爾斯 ； 方法論 ； 政治理論 ； 思考

台灣政治學刊

25卷2期（2021 / 12 / 01）

219 - 263

英文

This paper reconsiders Hannah Arendt's ＂method＂ of political thinking and its implicated critiques of the Rawlsian methodology of political philosophy today, namely, the reflective equilibrium. By addressing Arendt's approach to political thinking and comparing it with John Rawls' counterpart, I argue that inasmuch as thinking cannot be reduced to philosophising, the outcome of thinking is by no means nothing but philosophy, either. That is to say, in opposition to the analytic method of normative political philosophy ever since Rawls, I contend that reflective equilibrium, as Rawls and some political philosophers proposed, is not the paradigmatic method of thinking on political matters and that political philosophy (or in Rawls' words the coherent theory) is not the only possible product of political thinking. Based on these points, this paper concludes that Arendt's approach to political thinking, namely, thinking in plurality and judgmental theory, could provide a trenchant critique of the belief that is held by Rawlsians and most philosophers today. That is, reflective equilibrium and political philosophising are neither adequate for theorising politics nor the best way of thinking about political matters.

這篇文章探討漢娜．鄂蘭的政治理論「方法」以及其所隱含的對於當今羅爾斯式政治哲學方法－亦即反思均衡－的批判。藉由討論鄂蘭的政治思考途徑並將之與約翰．羅爾斯的方法論加以對照，本文試圖論證：如果思考本身無法被化約為哲學式思考，那麼思考的產物就不完全是哲學了。換言之，一反羅爾斯與一些政治哲學家們所提倡者，本文宣稱「反思均衡（或者說，規範性政治哲學的分析方法）」並非思考政治事務的唯一或主要途徑，而政治「哲學」（以羅爾斯的語彙來說，即邏輯一致的理論）亦非政治思考的唯一可能產物。以該論證為基礎，本文嘗試總結到：鄂蘭的政治思考途徑－亦即以多元性來思考，並獲致判斷性的理論－可以對當今羅爾斯主義者們以及大部分哲學家們的信念提出一個深刻的批判。那就是，反思均衡與哲學式思考既不但無法充分地理論化政治活動，也不是思考政治事務的最佳方法。

1. Allen, Amy(ed.)(2008).Hannah Arendt.London, UK:Routledge.
2. Arendt, Hannah(1998).The Human Condition.Chicago, IL:The University of Chicago Press.
3. Arendt, Hannah(2005).The Promise of Politics.New York, NY:Schocken Books.
4. Arendt, Hannah(2013).Hannah Arendt: The Last Interview and Other Conversations.London, UK:Melville House Publishing.
5. Arendt, Hannah(1990).Philosophy and Politics.Social Research,57(1),73-103.
6. Arendt, Hannah(1982).Lectures on Kant’s Political Philosophy.Chicago, IL:The University of Chicago Press.
7. Arendt, Hannah(1977).The Life of the Mind.New York, NY:Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, Inc..
8. Arendt, Hannah(2003).Responsibility and Judgment.New York, NY:Schocken Books.
9. Arendt, Hannah(2006).Between Past and Future.New York, NY:Penguin Books.
10. Arndt, David(2019).Arendt on the Political.Cambridge, UK:Cambridge University Press.
11. Bedorf, Thomas(ed.),Herrmann, Steffen(ed.)(2020).Political Phenomenology: Experience, Ontology, Episteme.New York, NY:Routledge.
12. Benhabib, Seyla(ed.),Cornell, Drucilla(ed.)(1987).Feminism as Critique: Essays on the Politics of Gender in Late-Capitalist Society.Cambridge, UK:Polity Press.
13. Bernstein, Richard J.(2002).Arendt on Thinking.The Cambridge Companion to Hannah Arendt,Cambridge, UK:
14. Blau, Adrian(ed.)(2017).Methods in Analytical Political Theory.Cambridge, UK:Cambridge University Press.
15. Canovan, Margaret(1983).Arendt, Rousseau, and Human Plurality in Politics.The Journal of Politics,45(2),286-302.
16. Cath, Yuri(2016).Reflective Equilibrium.The Oxford Handbook of Philosophical Methodology,Oxford, UK:
17. Cohen, Gerald A.(2011).On the Currency of Egalitarian Justice, and Other Essays in Political Philosophy.Princeton, NJ:Princeton University Press.
18. D’entrèves, Maurizio Passerin(2002).Arendt’s Theory of Judgment.The Cambridge Companion to Hannah Arendt,Cambridge, UK:
19. de Maagt, Sem(2017).Reflective Equilibrium and Moral Objectivity.Inquiry,60(5),443-465.
20. Disch, Lisa Jane(1994).Hannah Arendt and the Limits of Philosophy.London, UK:Cornell University Press.
21. Erman, Eva,Möller, Niklas(2016).What Distinguishes the Practice-Dependent Approach to Justice?.Philosophy and Social Criticism,42(1),3-23.
22. Farrelly, Colin(2007).Justice in Ideal Theory: A Refutation.Political Studies,55(4),844-864.
23. Guess, Raymond(2008).Philosophy and Real Politics.Princeton, NJ:Princeton University Press.
24. Hamlin, Alan,Stemplowska, Zofia(2012).Theory, Ideal Theory and the Theory of Ideals.Political Studies Review,10(1),48-62.
25. Hay, Colin(2002).Political Analysis.New York, NY:Red Globe Press.
26. Kelly, Thomas,McGrath, Sarah(2010).Is Reflective Equilibrium Enough?.Philosophical Perspectives,24(1),325-359.
27. List, Christian,Valentini, Laura(2016).The Methodology of Political Theory.The Oxford Handbook of Philosophical Methodology,Oxford, UK:
28. Mouffe, Chantal(2005).On the Political.London, UK:Routledge.
29. O’Neill, Onora(1989).Constructions of Reason: Explorations of Kant’s Practical Philosophy.Cambridge, UK:Cambridge University Press.
30. Owen, David(2016).Reasons and practices of reasoning: On the analytic/Continental distinction in political philosophy.European Journal of Political Theory,15(2),172-188.
31. Rawls, John(2005).Political Liberalism.New York, NY:Columbia University Press.
32. Rawls, John(1999).A Theory of Justice.Cambridge, MA:Harvard University Press.
33. Raz, Joseph(1982).The Claims of Reflective Equilibrium.Inquiry,25(3),307-330.
34. Scanlon, Thomas M.(2002).Rawls on Justification.The Cambridge Companion to Rawls,Cambridge, MA:
35. Singer, Peter(1974).Sidgwick and Reflective Equilibrium.The Monist,58(3),490-517.
36. Stemplowska, Zofia,Swift, Adam(2012).Ideal and Nonideal Theory.The Oxford Handbook of Political Philosophy,Oxford, UK:
37. Stemplowska, Zofia,Swift, Adam(2013).Rawls on Ideal and Nonideal Theory.A Companion to Rawls,Hoboken, NJ:
38. Swift, Adam(2008).The Value of Philosophy in Nonideal Circumstances.Social Theory and Practice,34(3),363-387.
39. Valentini, Laura(2012).Ideal vs. Non-ideal Theory: A Conceptual Map.Philosophy Compass,7(9),654-664.
40. Vogler, Gisli,Tillyris, Demetris(2019).Arendt and Political Realism: Towards a Realist Account of Political Judgment.Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy,24(6),821-844.
41. Vollrath, Ernst,Fantel, Hans(1977).Hannah Arendt and the Method of Political Thinking.Social Research,44(1),160-182.
42. Waldron, Jeremy(1999).Law and Disagreement.Oxford, UK:Oxford University Press.
43. Walzer, Michael(1985).Interpretation and Social Criticism.Cambridge, MA:Harvard University Press.
44. Williams, Bernard(2005).In the Beginning was the Deed: Realism and Moralism in Political Argument.Princeton, NJ:Princeton University Press.
45. Young-Bruehl, Elisabeth(2004).Hannah Arendt: For Love of the World.New Haven, CT:Yale University Press.