PDF(1510 KB)
PDF(1510 KB)
PDF(1510 KB)
作为技艺的宣传——埃吕尔论技艺社会与宣传
Propaganda as Technique: Ellul On the Technique Society and Propaganda
埃吕尔是从旧宣传研究向新宣传研究转型的关键人物,也是一位影响深远的技术哲学家,其宣传研究建立在其技术哲学基础之上。他从哲学社会学视角剖析了技艺社会的整体逻辑,并以技艺社会的整体逻辑反思了作为社会现象的宣传,以及技艺与宣传所导致的政治幻象。埃吕尔的宣传研究超越了视宣传者意图决定的相对主义,也不同于考察宣传效果的实证主义,直指宣传的本质。埃吕尔对传播学的贡献不止于宣传研究,他实际上提供了一整套关于媒介、个体和社会的宏大叙事。在媒介技术广泛渗透的当下,埃吕尔对宣传技艺的哲学社会学阐释对传播技术主义研究范式颇具启发。在将传播现象作为整体来考察并关注媒介形式方面,埃吕尔与麦克卢汉有共同之处,但前者将技术作为整体隐喻坚持的更为彻底。与麦克卢汉的文学背景不同,其宣传研究的理论取向源自卡尔·马克思和马克斯·韦伯的社会学。
Ellul played a key role in the transformation of western propaganda study, meanwhile he was also a famous philosopher of technology. His propaganda research is based on the philosophy of technique. From the perspective of philosophy and sociology, Ellul explored the logic of the technological society, and reflected on propaganda as a technique and the western democratic illusion caused by technique and propaganda with the logic of the technological society. He goes beyond the relativism determined by the propagandist's intention, and also different from the positivism to investigate the publicity effect, pointing directly to the essence of propaganda. His contribution to communication is far more than propaganda research. He actually provides a set of grand narratives about media, individuals and society. Nowadays, media technology has widely penetrated into human society. Ellul’s social philosophical interpretation of propaganda may inspire the technicism research paradigm of communication. In terms of investigating and paying attention to the form of media phenomenon as a whole, Ellul and McLuhan have something in common, but he insists on technique as a whole metaphor more thoroughly, and different from McLuhan’s literary background, his theoretical orientation of propaganda research originates from the sociology of Karl Marx and Max Weber.
| [1] |
艾里亚斯·卡内提(1960/2003). 《群众与权力》(冯文光、刘敏、张毅译). 北京: 中央编译出版社.
|
| [2] |
奥尔特加·加塞特(1929/2012). 《大众的反叛》(刘训练、佟德志译). 广州: 广东人民出版社.
|
| [3] |
狄仁昆, 曹观法(2002). “雅克埃吕尔的技术哲学”. 《国外社会科学》,(2),16-21.
|
| [4] |
弗雷德里克·希伯特, 西奥多·彼得森, 威尔伯·施拉姆(1956/2008). 《传媒的四种理论》(戴鑫译). 北京: 中国人民大学出版社.
|
| [5] |
汉娜·阿伦特(1951/2008). 《极权主义的起源》(林骧华译). 北京: 生活·读书·新知三联书店.
|
| [6] |
刘海龙(2007). 西方宣传概念的变迁:从旧宣传到新宣传. 《国际新闻界》,(9),36-40.
|
| [7] |
刘海龙(2013). 《宣传:观念、话语及其正当化》. 北京: 中国大百科全书出版社.
|
| [8] |
马丁·海德格尔(1977/2004). 《林中路》(孙周兴译). 上海: 上海译文出版社.
|
| [9] |
梅其君(2006). 埃吕尔与温纳德技术本质观之比较. 《自然辩证法研究》,(8),43-46.
|
| [10] |
梅其君(2008). 埃吕尔的技术环境论探析. 《江西社会科学》,(2),52-56.
|
| [11] |
梅其君(2009). 技术何以自主—技术自主论之批判. 《东岳论从》,(5),181-184.
|
| [12] |
梅其君, 王立平(2016). 埃吕尔论技术与文化关系之转变. 《贵州大学学报(社会科学版)》,(3),1-5.
|
| [13] |
沃尔特·李普曼(1922/2018). 《舆论》(常江、肖寒译). 北京: 北京大学出版社.
|
| [14] |
曾建辉(2017). 雅克·埃吕尔媒介哲学谫论. 燕山大学学报(哲学社会科学版),(3),5-10.
|
| [15] |
|
| [16] |
|
| [17] |
|
| [18] |
|
| [19] |
|
| [20] |
|
| [21] |
|
| [22] |
|
| [23] |
|
| [24] |
The history, philosophy, sociology and even the science of science are by now thriving activities. This is in no way surprising; indeed if one examines the development of each of these approaches to the study of sciences, the surprising thing is that it emerged so comparatively recently. The history of science as an academic discipline tends to begin with a reference to Comte's grand scheme of the mid-nineteenth century, passing through Sarton's great pioneering work of the first half of the present century, largely embodied in the volumes of Isis (1913- ), founded, edited and in no small part written by Sarton himself. At present, so far as one can see, many historians of science are rethinking the great and fairly continuously progressive features of Sarton's account, and the emphasis is turning more and more to the discontinuities.
|
| [25] |
|
| [26] |
|
| [27] |
|
| [28] |
|
| [29] |
|
| [30] |
|
| [31] |
|
| [32] |
|
| [33] |
|
/
| 〈 |
|
〉 |