Postmodern journeys 06

Walk on  06

By Joseph Natoli

Translated by Springhero

      What is needed in the end is a jump from one paradigm to another, one social/cultural/personal lifeworld to another, one way of perceiving, knowing, and therefore producing the world to another. William Blake writes of such epistemological alterations that have ontological effects, of moving across paradigms, or what he calls ‘ visionary modes,” from one-fold to four-fold perceptions.

        最後我們還需要從一個典範跳躍到另一個典範,從一個社會、文化和個人的生存世界跳躍到另一個生存世界,從感覺、認知、創造世界的方法,到另一個方法。「維廉、布雷克」曾描述過,這種認知的轉換會有動搖本體的效用,越過不同的典範,或他所說的「視覺模式」,從一種感覺模式變成四種感覺模式。

       I have no trouble with this ; as a postmodernist I first want to know what “ reality frame” someone is in, or some society, or how many reality frames does this culture now express, and so on. What reality am I dealing with here at this time and in this place? What are the special circumstances of “ being” in this world at this time? Into what are we here thrown, and how does this produce a state of throwness which we mistake for stable being, for the ineluctable conditions of human nature and existence.

         這種跳躍對於我並不困難。作為後現代主義者,我首先要知道我們個人或社會在怎樣的「真理架構」裡,或是這種文化表現了多少的「真理架構」等等?以及我此時此地是在跟怎樣的真理架構打交道?此時存在於世界的特殊況是什麼?我們被拋棄到怎樣的世界,這種拋棄的狀態怎麼會被誤認為穩定的存在?是人類天性及存在理所當然的存在?

        But only a person who already has made the jump perceives the necessity of making the jump, or, perceives where one is jumping to and from where. If you already believe that reason and all its foundational artifacts are transpersonal ( it’s the faculty by which humans communicate and get to know themselves and the world, although they possess it to varying degrees), and transcultural ( it travels even to cultures “ steeped in superstitions” and irrationalities), then it certainly is transparadigm( it works within whatever theoretical frame you construct).

        但是只有曾經跳躍過的人,才能感覺到有跳躍的需要,或是才能感覺到跳躍到哪裡,及從哪裡跳躍。假如你已經相信,理性及以理性作為基礎的文化,都是人際之間(人纇的溝通,以及了解自己和世界都是在人際之間完成,雖然程度各有不同),以及文化之間(即使所到達的文化,其實是充滿迷信跟非理性),那麼它的確是旅行於典範之間(不管你建造怎樣的理論架構都說得通)。

       If you take Kuhn’s original notion that paradigms are not merely discursive, theoretical frames but cognitive/perceptual/affective frames that societies and cultures adopt at various times and then proceed to reality make and reality test within the parameters of those frames, and that, further, paradigms can follow each other in time but remain incommensurable, then the idea of a special faculty lying outside the influence of the paradigm becomes very moot.

        假如你接受「柯恩」原創性的觀念:典範不僅僅是論辯性的、理論性的架構,而是認知性、感覺性和情意性的架構,是社會和文化在不同時空所採用,然後成為這些架構下真理的品牌和檢驗。而且典範雖然能夠隨著時光互相推波助瀾,卻無法豎立同一評鑑標準。置身於典範影響之外的特異才能,就有自求多福的空間。

    

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: