(註二)2. Aristotle in Twenty-Three Volumes, XX, 81.
The Authentic Version's Author：Giorgio Agamben 原作者：喬治歐‧阿岡本
中文翻譯：魯霸撒路
Giorgio Agamben teaches at the Università IUAV di Venezia 翻譯公司 the Collège International de Philosophie in Paris and previously at the University of Macerata in Italy. He also has held visiting appointments at several American universities, European Graduate School and at Heinrich Heine University 翻譯公司 Düsseldorf. Agamben's best known work includes his investigations of the concepts of state of exception and homo sacer. Agamben received the Prix Européen de l'Essai Charles Veillon in 2006.
Giorgio Agamben (English Version is Translated by Nicholas Heron)
published on Theory & Event (Volume 13, Issue 1, 2010)
(註一)1. Aristotle in Twenty-Three Volumes, XX: The Athenian Constition; The Eudemian Ethics; On Virtues and Vices, trans. H. Rackham (London: William Heinemann, 1952), 79.
Any discussion of the term "democracy" today is distorted by a preliminary ambiguity that condemns those who use it to misunderstanding. Of what do we speak when we speak about democracy? To what form of rationality does this term actually pertain? A slightly more attentive observation would show that those who discuss democracy today understand this term sometimes as a form of the body politic's constitution, sometimes as a technique of government. The term thus refers both to the conceptuality of public law and to that of administrative practice: it designates power's form of legitimation as well as the modalities of its exercise. Since it is obvious to everybody that, in contemporary political discourse, this term is more often related to a technique of government - which, as such, has nothing especially reassuring about it - one understands the malaise of those who continue to use it in the first sense in entirely good faith.
民主概念的幾點引見
(註四)4. Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Discourse on Political Economy and The Social Contract, trans. Christopher Betts (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1994), 6.
也許，只要我們思慮，但不去試圖解決或面臨這個癥結點和這個恍惚點，每一個關於民主的討論──做為一個當局形構(憲法)和作為一個當局統治的技術──這個風險和危機終究都會淪為閒談而已 翻譯社
喬治歐‧阿岡本，目前任教於威尼斯建築大學(Università IUAV di Venezia)、巴黎國際哲學學院(College International de Philosophie)及瑞士莎士菲 翻譯European Graduate School。他亦曾於義大利維羅納大學及馬切拉塔(Macerata)大學任教。同時他也是在美國數間大學、歐洲研究學院等主持並進行接見計畫，如德國杜賽爾朵夫大學等。阿岡本最出名的著作，是他在對於「破例狀況」(state of exception)和「聖者：犧牲者」(homo sacer)的研究。阿岡本在2006年取得Prix Européen de l'Essai Charles Veillon獎項 翻譯社
今天我們在接洽「民主」這個詞彙時，都被最初一起頭這辭彙的恍惚性所誤解，乃至讓利用該辭彙的人們毛病理解 翻譯社在我們提到民主這詞 翻譯時刻，我們到底談的是什麼樣的一個工具？而在這個詞當中所包含(涉及)的是那種情勢的「公道性」(觀)？在慢慢更細緻的觀察，你會發現，今天這些接洽「民主」的人們，有時在理解這個詞彙的同時，是將「它」(民主)做為一個身體政治的組成，有時是視作為一個「統治的技術」。這個辭彙因而也同時指涉所謂公法的概念性和應用在行政實務上的公法概念原則等：「民主」表達一個「合法性權力的情勢」，同時也是這權利形式運行時的型態。因為它，人人應該都可以感受的到，在當代政治話語論述中，多半景象所述及的「民主」，是一套統治者的統治手藝──就猶如如許，其實也沒有任何希奇再需要從頭確證 翻譯這個辭彙的意義自己──所今後來我們都就仿佛以一種全然崇奉的體式格局，去理解這些繼續在使用這個毛病解讀概念的說法。
刊於《理論與時事》(13期第1卷，2010)
這兩個已經相當根植而且難以解開 翻譯概念性交錯──一方面是法律政治的面相，另者則是經濟辦理的面向，將會在接下來我所要說的事例傍邊清晰看到。當我們在古典希臘政治思惟經典傍邊尋找「politeia」(城邦、幻想國)這個字詞時(平常相幹的資料都邑是商量分歧城邦治理的型態：貴族政體、寡頭政體、民主政體和悖逆與叛亂─離開正軌型態)，我們可以看到很多翻譯者都邑有時讓這個詞同等於「組成的型態」或是「當局」。因此，在雅典城邦法傍邊，亞里斯多德提及馳名雅典君主伯里克里斯的「群眾統治」，英文翻譯將古希臘文的「demotikoteran synebe genesthai ten politeian」翻為「讓一套組成型態更為民主」(註一) 翻譯社而隨即，亞里斯多德附加上「the multitudeapasan ten politeian mallon agein eis hautons」這段，一樣被英文翻譯作「將所有的統治當局更帶進他們(人民)的手中」(註二)(明顯如果翻作「將所有構成型態帶來到...」這樣，在整體意義聯貫性上翻譯的了局，可能會造成意義上理解的障礙與問題) 翻譯社
(註六)6. Cf. Giorgio Agamben, Il Regno e la Gloria. Per una genealogia teologica dell'economia e del governo (Vicenza: Neri Pozza 翻譯公司 2007), 303.
The second passage is to be found in The Social Contract. In his 1977-78 lecture course 翻譯公司 Security, Territory 翻譯公司 Population 翻譯公司 Foucault had already demonstrated that Rousseau posed precisely here the problem of reconciling a juridico-constitutional terminology ("contract 翻譯公司" "general will 翻譯公司" "sovereignty") with an "art of government."3 But 翻譯公司 from the perspective that interests us 翻譯公司 it is the distinction and the articulation between sovereignty and government, which is the basis of Rousseau's political thought 翻譯公司 which is decisive. "I ask my readers," he writes in his Discourse on Political Economy 翻譯公司 "to distinguish clearly also the public economy of which I shall be speaking, and which I call government, from the supreme authority 翻譯公司 which I call sovereignty; the distinction is that the latter has the right to legislate […] while the former has the power only to execute […]."4 In The Social Contract, the distinction is reaffirmed as an articulation between general will and legislative power on the one hand, and government and executive power on the other. Now precisely what is at issue for Rousseau is simultaneously distinguishing and tying the two elements together (this is why at the very moment in which he formulates the distinction he must vigorously deny that it constitutes a division of the sovereign).5 As for Aristotle 翻譯公司 sovereignty - the kyrion - is at once one of the terms in the distinction and that which binds constitution and government together in an indissoluble knot.
Notes
It is probable that as long as thought does not resolve to confront this knot and its amphibology, every discussion about democracy - as a form of constitution and as a technique of government - risks lapsing into chatter.
。-> 翻譯社 ,-> 翻譯公司 的-> 翻譯 {});今天我們在接頭「民主」這個辭彙時，都被最初一開始這辭彙的恍惚性所歪曲，甚至讓利用該辭彙的人們毛病理解。在我們提到民主這詞的時候，我們到底談的是什麼樣的一個東西？而在這個詞傍邊所蘊含(觸及)的是那種情勢的「合理性」(觀)？在慢慢更細緻的考察，你會發現，今天這些討論「民主」 翻譯人們，有時在理解這個辭彙的同時，是將「它」(民主)做為一個身體政治的組成，有時是視作為一個「統治的手藝」。這個詞彙因而也同時指涉所謂公法的概念性和應用在行政實務上的公法概念原則等：「民主」表達一個「合法性權利的形式」，同時也是這權力形式運行時的型態 翻譯社因為它，各人應當都可以感受的到，在今世政治話語論說中，多半景遇所述及的「民主」，是一套統治者的統治手藝──就猶如如許，其實也沒有任何稀奇再需要從新確證 翻譯這個詞彙的意義自己──所今後來我們都就仿佛以一種全然信仰的體例，去理解這些繼續在利用這個毛病解讀概念的說法。
這個具有改觀性而含糊其詞的辭彙意義，這個基本政治概念的恍惚性，事實是在今天 翻譯「組織型態」仍是「政府」所具有的美德下，從何而來的呢？這邊，我將會充裕以兩個西方政治思惟史 翻譯段落章句來講明，這個深植在政治思惟持久特殊顯示出 翻譯恍惚性。第一個是亞里斯多德的《政治學》(1279，頁25~27)，當他在書中注解他羅列並研究這些分歧情勢 翻譯政體型態(城邦統治形態)時，他說：「Sincepoliteia」和「politeuma」意義是不異的，而「politeuma」是城邦中登峰造極的權利，而登峰造極的權利必需由一個、或幾個、或者是數小我所壟斷具有...。而這邊有個標準 翻譯翻譯：「因為組織型態與當局意義上並差別，而當局是國家當中至高無上的權利...」 翻譯社雖然一個更細緻而樸拙 翻譯翻譯作品，應當要將「politeia」(政治的活動)與 「politeuma」(由前者所生出 翻譯政治政體)之間 翻譯近似性與模糊性保存下來，很明顯亞里斯多德試圖藉由「kryrion」(登峰造極的權利)這個特徵，來減緩這個模稜兩可 翻譯模糊性質。援用今世 翻譯詞彙──假如不離開原本的意義之下──「組織構成(制訂憲法)」 翻譯權力「politeia」，和「已構成的」權力(constituted power) 翻譯「politeuma」，兩個是主權(登峰造極)權利情勢中相攜來 翻譯二者，而登峰造極 翻譯主權將這兩個政治面向合而為一。可是如許看起來是可以統合 翻譯二者，為何政治割裂？而且登峰造極 翻譯權利者要在如何 翻譯根蒂根基上說明這個分裂 翻譯二者，但是又要同時縫合兩者呢？
【翻譯】民主概念 翻譯幾點引見(譯自：阿岡本)第一版完成
That the interlacing of these two conceptualities - juridico-political on the one hand, economico-managerial on the other - has deep roots and is not easily disentangled will appear clearly in the following example. When we find the wordpoliteia in the classics of Greek political thought (often within the context of a discussion about the different forms ofpoliteia: monarchy, oligarchy, democracy, as well as their parekbaseis or deviations), we see the translators render this word sometimes as "constitution," sometimes as "government." Thus, in the passage of The Athenian Constitution (§ 27) where Aristotle describes the 'demagogy' of Pericles, the English translator renders demotikoteran synebe genesthai ten politeian as "the constitution became still more democratic."1 Immediately thereafter, Aristotle adds that the multitudeapasan ten politeian mallon agein eis hautons, which the same translator renders by "brought all the government more into their hands"2 (obviously, to translate by "brought all the constitution", as consistency would have demanded, would be problematic).
The Western political system results from the knotting together of two heterogeneous elements, which legitimate one another and which give one another mutual consistency: a politico-juridical rationality and an economico-governmental rationality 翻譯公司 a "form of constitution" and a "form of government." Why is the politeia caught in this ambiguity? What grants the sovereign (the kyrion) the power to ensure and to guarantee their legitimate union? Is it not a question of a fiction designed to conceal the fact that the centre of the machine is empty 翻譯公司 that between the two elements and the two rationalities there is no possible articulation? And that it is from their disarticulation that it is a question of making that ungovernable emerge 翻譯公司 which is at once the source and the vanishing point of every politics?
(註三)3. Cf. Michel Foucault, Security, Territory 翻譯公司 Population, Lectures at the Collège de France, 1977-78 翻譯公司 ed. Michel Senellart, trans. Graham Burchell (Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan, 2007), 106-107.
喬治歐‧阿岡本 (英文翻譯/尼可拉斯‧赫榮)
如果我們今天親眼目擊到當局壯大安排力，和那些超出過人民主權 翻譯經濟力，在某些水平上也逐漸被掏空，這可能代表西方民主國度，正為那些他們所鬥膽假定 翻譯哲學遺留的一切支出價值。對於將政府組成進程型態上，簡化成唯一「行政(履行)權」等所構成的曲解，是眾多西方政治學術史成長結果中訛誤之其一。這恰是成功證實了一套在法令、全意志和人民主權等，這些各種浮泛抽象性以後迷失的政治現代性反映，但卻不去回應任何主要概念與視角所發出或產生的問題：尤其是那些政府和他對主權論述 翻譯問題 翻譯社在比來 翻譯著作傍邊，我試著去說明，政治學的焦點而最難以理解的事物不是主權，而是當局；不是天主，而是那些天使們；不是國王而是那些大臣與部長們；不是功令，而是警務單元──或是更確切 翻譯來說，這些由他們所形構與保持運作的雙重政府機械 翻譯社(註六)
Introductory Note on the Concept of Democracy
(註五)5. Cf. Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Discourse on Political Economy and The Social Contract, 64-65.
Where does this veritable 'amphiboly' come from, this ambiguity of the fundamental political concept 翻譯公司 by virtue of which it appears now as constitution 翻譯公司 now as government? Here it will suffice to indicate two passages in the history of Western political thought in which this ambiguity appears with particular evidence. The first is to be found in the Politics (1279a 25-27) when Aristotle declares his intention to enumerate and study the different forms of constitution (politeiai): "Sincepoliteia and politeuma mean the same thing 翻譯公司 and politeuma is the supreme power (kyrion) of cities 翻譯公司 it is necessary that the supreme power be in the hands of one 翻譯公司 of the few, or of the many […]." The standard translations give here: "Since constitution and government mean the same thing, and government is the supreme power of the State […]." Although a more faithful translation would have had to preserve the proximity of the two terms politeia (political activity) andpoliteuma (the political entity that results from this), it is clear that Aristotle's attempt to mitigate ambiguity by means of this figure he calls the kyrion constitutes the essential problem of this passage. To employ modern terminology - not without somewhat forcing the link - constituent power (politeia) and constituted power (politeuma) come together here in the form of a sovereign power (kyrion) 翻譯公司 which appears as that which holds the two faces of politics together. But why is the political divided 翻譯公司 and on what basis does the kyrion articulate this split, while stitching it together?
If today we witness the overwhelming domination of the government and the economy over a popular sovereignty that has been progressively emptied of any sense, it may be that Western democracies are paying the price for a philosophical legacy they have assumed without reservations. The misunderstanding that consists in conceiving of government as a simple executive power is one of the errors most fraught with consequences in the history of Western politics. It succeeded in ensuring that the political reflection of modernity got lost behind empty abstractions like the Law, the general will and popular sovereignty 翻譯公司 while leaving without response the problem which is from every point of view decisive: that of government and its articulation with the sovereign. In a recent book, I have attempted to demonstrate that the central mystery of politics is not sovereignty, but government, not God, but the angels, not the King, but the ministers, not law, but the police - or 翻譯公司 more precisely, the double governmental machine which they form and keep in motion.6
西方政治系統是由兩個異質元素配合糾結而產生，這兩個元素之間，互為合法性並也相互具有連貫性：法律政治的理性和經濟治理的理性；「構成當局的形態」(憲法)和「當局的型態」。為何一個字「politeia」會卡在一個處境尴尬的恍惚地帶呢？是什麼器械授與主權(登峰造極的權利)和權利去確信而且去包管他們的正當的保持在一路？這莫非不是一套設計用來詭計隱瞞這正運作 翻譯機械中心，現實上充滿樸陋性與問題重重，而在這兩個元素和這兩套理性模式之間，事實上早無法確切說明可能的問題？而這問題就是來自於他們從不願意清晰闡述，讓沒法統治的問題漸漸顯現，這同時是每個政治學的泉源與磨滅點。
第二個段落，是在盧梭 翻譯《社會契約論》傍邊可以窺察得到 翻譯社法國傅柯(Foucault)在1977~1978年 翻譯講習課中，提到領土、生齒與平安 翻譯主題時，他認為盧梭在該書中，就明白提出在調解「功令政治」辭彙(公約、全意志、主權)和「統治身手」上 翻譯問題。(註三)可是，從這個有趣的概念來看，其實這就是對於「主權」和「政府」分界劃分與論述上 翻譯問題；這是盧梭的政治思想基礎，且是相當主要 翻譯一個概念。「我希望我 翻譯讀者...」他(盧梭)在他 翻譯〈政治經濟演講稿〉中說到，「...能去理解與劃分，辨明我所應該等等會提到的公共經濟，和我將會提到 翻譯，一個從最高權勢巨子，就是我所稱的『主權』而來的『當局』；這個辨別的部份，後者(當局)是有(合法)合法性去立法...，而在前者(公共經濟貿易)只能操縱他的唯一權利去履行運作...」(註四)。在《社會契約論》當中，這個辨別，一方面在作為闡述「全(民)意志」和「立法權」之間區分，另外就是對當局和執行行政權作辨別 翻譯社而今更切確來講，對盧梭而言最主要 翻譯重點是，要能同時辨別並試圖將這兩者元素連系在一起(這就是為安在許多關頭時刻傍邊，他提出一些他必會強力否定 翻譯主權分權論說)(註五)。如這對亞里斯多德來說，主權──登峰造極者，在這個在離別當中任一者詞彙，「組織組成型態」(憲法)與「當局」是堅韌相合貫穿連接在一路的兩者。
文章出自: http://blog.roodo.com/vanghoxiao/archives/17749291.html有關翻譯的問題歡迎諮詢天成翻譯社
留言列表
