Present-dayphilosophers?Present-dayphilosophersusuallyenvisiontheirdisciplineasanendeavorthathasbeen,sinceantiquity,distinctfromandsuperiortoanyparticularinlectualdiscipline,suchastheologyorscience.?Suchphilosophicalconcernsasthemind-bodyproblemor,moregenerally,thenatureofhumanknowledge,theybelieve,arebasichumanquestionswhosetentativephilosophicalsolutionshaveservedasthenecessaryfoundationsonwhichallotherinlectualspeculationhasrested.?哲學家通把他們的學想象為自古來直區別并且優于如或科這種特定智科的一種努力。他們相信，如哲學對于問題的關注或者更一般，對于人類識性?Thebasisforthisview,however,liesinaseriousmisinterpretationofthepast,aprojectionofmodernconcernsontopastevents.?Theideaofanautonomousdisciplinecalled“philosophy,”distinctfromandsittinginjudgmentonsuchpursuitsastheologyandscienceturnsout,oncloseexamination,tobeofquiterecentorigin.?When,intheseventeenthcentury,DescartesandHobbesrejectedmedievalphilosophy,theydidnotthinkofthemselves,asmodernphilosophersdo,asproposinganewandbetterphilosophy,butratherasfurthering“thewarfarebetweenscienceandtheology”.?Theywerefighting,albeitdiscreetly,toopentheinlectualworldtothenewscienceandtoliberateinlectuallifefromecclesiasticalphilosophyandenvisionedtheirworkascontributingtothegrowth,notofphilosophy,butofresearchinmathematicsandphysics.?Thislinkbetweenphilosophicalinterestsandscientificpracticepersisteduntilthenineteenthcentury,whendeclineinecclesiasticalpoweroverscholarshipandchangesinthenatureofscienceprovokedthefinalseparationofphilosophyfromboth.?然而，這個觀點的依據存在于對過去的嚴重誤解之中，把現代的關注投射在過去的上。?仔 于近代。?當17世紀Descartes和Hobbes 是更新穎的、更完善的哲學，而是認為自己在和科學的。?他們力爭為新科學開辟智力世界，并且為了把智力生活從哲學中解放出來而奮斗，盡管這種奮斗是謹慎的，他們把自己的工作憧憬為對數學和物理學研究的促進，而不是對哲學本身的促進。?哲學上的點與科學實踐之間的聯系持續到19世紀，那時候對于學術研究控制的削弱以及科學性質的改變將哲學從神?Thedemarcationofphilosophyfromsciencewasfacilitatedbythedevelopmentintheearlynineteenthcenturyofanewnotion,thatphilosophy’scoreinterestshouldbeepistemology,thegeneralexnationofwhatitmeanstoknowsomething.?ModernphilosophersnowtracethatnotionbackatleasttoDescartesandSpinoza,butitwasnotexplicitlyarticulateduntilthelateeighteenthcentury,byKant,anddidnot ebuiltintothestructureofacademicinstitutionsandthestandardself-descriptionsofphilosophyprofessorsuntilthelatenineteenthcentury.?Withouttheideaofepistemology,thesurvivalofphilosophyinanageofmodernscienceishardtoimagine.?Metaphysics,philosophy’straditionalcore—consideredasthemostgeneraldescriptionofhowtheheavensandtheearthareputtogether—hadbeenrenderedalmostcompleymeaninglessbythespectacularprogressofphysics.?Kant,however,byfocusingphilosophyontheproblemofknowledge,managedtorecemetaphysicswithepistemology,andthustotransformthenotionofphilosophyas“queenofsciences”intothenewnotionofphilosophyasaseparate,foundationaldiscipline.?Philosophybecame“primary”nolongerinthesenseof“highest”butinthesenseof“underlying”.?AfterKant,philosopherswereabletoreinterpretseventeenth-andeighteenth-centurythinkersasattemptingtodiscover“Howisourknowledgepossible?”andtoprojectthisquestionbackevenontheancients.?一個新觀點的發展在19世紀初推動了哲學與科學的劃分，這個新觀點認為哲學應該是溯到了Descartes和Spinoza18世紀末期才被Kant清楚地闡述出來，并且直到19世紀末期它才融合到學術機構中以及哲學教授自我描述的標準的學科中。?要是沒有認識論這個概念，我們難以想象哲學學科在現代科學的時代中如何能生存下去。?作為哲學的傳統，形而上學?然而，Kant把哲學聚焦到認識問題上，想方設法用認識論來取代形而上學，因此把哲學看作是“科學高在上”，而是一個“基礎”?哲學家們以Kant1718世紀思想家重新解釋為Althoughahistorical?AlthoughahistoricallackofaccesstoformalSpanish-languageeducationinitiallylimitedtheopportunitiesofsomeChicanostohonetheirskillsaswritersofSpanish,theirbilingualcultureclearlyfosteredanexuberantandcompellingoraltradition.?Ithasthusgenerallybeenbywayoftheemphasisonoralli creativitythattheseChicanowriters,whoseEnglish-languageworksaresometimesuninspired,developedthepowerfulandarrestinglanguagethatcharacterizedtheirSpanish-languageworks.?ThisSpanish-Englishdifferenceisnotsurprising.?WhenwritinginSpanish,theseauthorsstayedclosetothespokentraditionsoftheircommunitieswherepublication,support,andinstructiveresponsewouldcomequicklyinlocalorregionalnewspapers.?WorksinEnglish,however,oftenrequiredtheeliminationofnuanceorcolloquialism,theadoptionofaformaltone,andtheadjustmentofthemesorideastosatisfythedifferentdemandsofnational?雖然歷史上正規西班牙語教育的機會的缺乏起初限制了某些Chicano人磨練自己的技術以及成為通過強調口語文學的創造性，這些Chicano作家才形成了鏗鏘有力且讓人著迷的語言，這也是他們西班法、采取正式的語氣、調整或想法來滿足性物的不同的需要。Itistheirsensitive?Itistheirsensitiveresponsetohumancircumstancethataccountsforthepersistenceofcertainuniversalideas.?RabbiMeir,asecond-centuryscholar,admonishedhisdisciplestolooknotatthepitcherbutatitscontentsbecause,hestated,“Manyanewpitcherhasbeenfoundtobefullofoldwine.”?Thiswashiswayofemphasizingtheimportanceofthedistinctionbetweenformandidea,andofstressingthattheintegrityofanideaismoreimportantthantheformofitsexpression.?對人類環境的敏銳反應可以解釋某些普適思想存在的原因。?RabbiMeir告誡自己的，要看罐子裝了什么、而不要看罐子本身，他說：“這是因為許多新罐裝的是舊酒”。?這?Creativeideasnotonlyproducetheirowninstrumentsofsurvivalastimeandcircumstancesdemand,butpermitthesubstitutionofnewformsforoldunderthepressureofchangedcircumstances.?Forexampledemocracy,asanidea,originatedinancientGreeceandwascarriedfromtheretoWesternEuropeandtheAmericas.?ButitdidnotretaintheancientGreekform:itpassedthroughseveralreformingprocessesandexiststodayinmanycountries.?Democratic ernmentsdifferinformbecausedemocracyisinprincipledynamicandhasthereforerespondedtolocalneeds.持古希臘的形式：它經歷數次，現在存在于多個國家之中。?也在形式上不同，因為Thisisnottodenythat?ThisisnottodenythattheBlackmusicoftheearlytwentiethcenturydifferedinimportantwaysfromtheslavespirituals.?Whereasspiritualswerecreatedanddisseminatedinfolkfashion,musicwascomposed,published,copyrighted,andsoldbyprofessionals.?Nevertheless,improvisationremainedcentraltomusic.?OnehasonlytolistentotherecordedrepertoireofsongstorealizethatBlacksingersrarelysangasongpreciselythesamewaytwiceandneveraccordingtoitsexactmusicalnotation.?Theyperformedwhatjazzmusicianscall“headarrangements”proceedingfromtheirownfeelingsandfromtheway“thespirit”movedthematthetime.?Thisimprovisatoryelementwasreflectedinthemannerinwhichmusicwaspublished.?BlackcomposersscoredthemusicintendedforWhitesinginggroupsfully,indicatingthevariousvocalpartsandthe paniment,butthemusicproducedforBlacksingersincludedonlyavocallineandpiano 歌的形式被創造和的，而音樂是由專業創作、、拿到后的。?可是，即興創作對于音樂仍然是很重要的。?人們去聽歌曲錄制的全部曲目就會了解到歌手幾乎不使出發，演唱的是爵士音樂家口中的“天資編排”的曲目。?這種即興元素反映在音樂的方式Bythetimethe?BythetimetheAmericancoloniststookuparmsagainstGreatBritaininordertosecuretheirindependence,theinstitutionofBlackslaverywasdeeplyentrenched.?Butthecontradictioninherentinthissituationwas,formany,asourceofconstantembarrassment.?“Italwaysappearedamostiniquitousschemetome,”AbigailAdamswroteherhusbandin1774,“tofightourselvesforwhatwearedailyrobbingandplunderingfromthosewhohaveasgoodarightto domaswehave.”?在殖民地人民為了獨立拿起 總會使很多人感覺尷尬。?“這對我來說好像是一個極其的，”AbigailAdams在1774年寫信給 ?ManyAmericansbesidesAbigailAdamswerestruckbytheinconsistencyoftheirstandduringtheWarofIndependence,andtheywerenotaversetomakingmovestoemancipatetheslaves.?Quakersandotherreligiousgroupsorganizedantislaverysocieties,whilenumerousindividualsmanumittedtheirslaves.?Infact,withinseveralyearsoftheendoftheWarofIndependence,mostoftheEasternstateshadmadeprovisionsforthegradualemancipationofslaves.?和AbigailAdams一樣，許多 期間都他們自相的立場，并且他們并不解放這些黑奴。?公誼會 團體組織了反的團體，而同時許多人也解放了他們的。?事實上，在獨立 Tocqueville,apparently,was?Tocqueville,apparently,waswrong.?JacksonianAmericawasnotafluid,egalitariansocietywhereindividualwealthandpovertywereephemeralconditions.?AtleastsoarguesE.PesseninhisiconoclasticstudyoftheveryrichintheUnitedStatesbetween1825and1850.?Tocqueville顯然是錯了。?在Jackson執政時期，并不是一個流動的主義社會，也不是一個個人貧富瞬息萬變的社會。?至少，在EPessen18251850?Pessendoespresentatyofexamples,togetherwithsomerefreshinglyinligiblestatistics,toestablishtheexistenceofaninordinaywealthyclass.?Thoughactiveincommerceortheprofessions,mostofthewealthywerenotself-made,buthadinheritedfamilyfortunes.?Innosensemercurial,thesegreatfortunessurvivedthefinancialpanicsthatdestroyedlesserones.?Indeed,inseveralcitiesthewealthiestonepercentconstantlyincreaseditsshareuntilby1850itownedhalfofthecommunity’swealth.?Althoughtheseobservationsaretrue,PessenoverestimatestheirimportancebyconcludingfromthemthattheundoubtedprogresstowardinequalityinthelateeighteenthcenturyintheJacksonianperiodandthattheUnitedStateswasaclass-ridden,plutocraticsocietyevenbeforeindustrialization.?Pessen確實列舉了大量事例以及一些讓人耳目一新且簡單易懂的統計數字，來證明確實存在極度富有的。?盡管他們在商界業界非常活躍，但大部分不是他們白手起家獲得的，而是通過繼承家業獲得的。?可以肯定的是，這些繼承來的巨大經受住了金融大的沖擊，而較小規模的卻被摧毀。?實際上，幾個城市里最富有的1%一直到1850年持續不斷地積累自己的，他們擁有了全社會一半的。?盡管這些觀察結果是正確的，但Pessen還是由于高估了這種情況的重要性而得出了這樣的結論：18世紀末發展起來的不現象一直延續到19世紀中葉Jackson總統時期是的，并且在工業化之前就是一個，財閥的社會。Inlargepartasa?Inlargepartasaconsequenceofthefeministmovement,historianshavefocusedagreatdealofattentioninrecentyearsondeterminingmoreaccuraythestatusofwomeninvariousperiods.?Althoughmuchhasbeen plishedforthemodernperiod,premoderncultureshaveprovedmoredifficult:sourcesarerestrictedinnumber,fragmentary,difficulttointerpret,andoftencontradictory.?Thusitisnotparticularlysurprisingthatsomeearlierscholarshipconcerningsuchcultureshassofargoneunchallenged.?AnexampleisJohannBachofen’s1861treatiseonAmazons,women-ruledsocietiesofquestionableexistencecontemporarywithancientGreece.女在各個歷史時期的地位。?雖然對現當代的研究成績斐然，但對古代文化的研究則被證明是更加?Startingfromthepremisethatmythologyandlegendpreserveatleastanucleusofhistoricalfact,Bachofenarguedthatwomenweredominantinmanyancientsocieties.?HisworkwasbasedonacomprehensivesurveyofreferencesintheancientsourcestoAmazonianandothersocietieswithmatrilinealcustoms—societiesinwhichdescentandpropertyrightsaretracedthroughthefemaleline.?SomesupportforhistheorycanbefoundinevidencesuchasthatdrawnfromHerodotus,theGreek“historian”ofthefifthcenturyB.C.,whospeaksofanAmazoniansociety,theSauromatae,wherethewomenhuntedandfoughtinwars.Awomaninthissocietywasnotallowedtomarryuntilshehadkilleda inbattle.?從史實的至少存在于神話、中這一前提出發，Bachofen認為女性在許多古代社會中占據著地位。?他的研究對古料來源中的參考材料進行綜合考慮，而這些參考材料涉及到Amazonian和其他帶有母系習俗的社會——在這些社會內，親緣關系和財產所均經由女性這條線來追溯。?可以找到一些支持他理論的，如從Herodotus那里獲取的曾談到某個Amazonian社會，即Sauromatae，在此社會內，女性進行狩獵并在中。該社會中的女性必須在戰斗中殺死一?Nonetheless,thisassumptionthatthefirstrecordersofancientmythshavepfactsisproblematic.?IfonebeginsbyexaminingwhyancientsrefertoAmazons,it esclearthatancientGreekdescriptionsofsuchsocietiesweremeantnotsomuchtorepresentobservedhistoricalfact—realAmazoniansocieties—butrathertooffer“morallessons”onthesupposed eofwomen’sruleintheirownsociety.?TheAmazonswereoftencharacterized,forexample,astheequivalentsofgiantsandcentaurs,enemiestobeslainbyGreekheroes.?Theircustomswerepresentednotasthoseofarespectablesociety,butastheveryantithesesofordinaryGreekpractices.眼目睹的歷史事實——真正的Amazon社會——還不如說是為女性可能產生的進行“道德訓導”?Thus,Iwouldargue,thepurposeofaccountsoftheAmazonsfortheirmaleGreekrecorderswasdidactic,toteachbothmaleandfemaleGreeksthatall-femalegroups,formedbywithdrawalfromtraditionalsociety,aredestructiveanddangerous.?MythsabouttheAmazonswereusedasargumentsforthemale-dominatedstatusquo,inwhichgroupscomposedexclusivelyofeither werenotpermittedtosegregatethemselvespermanentlyfromsociety.?Bachofenwasthusmisledinhisrelianceonmythsforinformationaboutthestatusofwomen.?Thesourcesthatwillprobablylcontemporaryhistoriansmostaboutwomenintheancientworldaresuchsocial sasgravestones,wills,andmarriagecontracts.?Studiesofsuch havealreadybeguntoshowhowmistakenwearewhenwetrytoderiveourpictureoftheancientworldexclusivelyfromli rysources,especiallymyths.因此，我認為對于述神話的希臘來描述mon人的目的是，要教誨古臘的男性和女性這樣一道理，即那脫離了傳統會形成的純女性群是有破壞性、是 的。有關mon人的神話是用來為的狀作護的，在這種狀下，僅僅由一 構成群不允許與社會永性隔絕開來。如此說來Bhon依賴神話來獲取有關女性地位的料是有誤導性的。有關古代界的婦女的可能對當學家最具價值的料是這樣一社會性文獻如墓碑、遺囑、婚約。這類文獻料的研究很證明我們犯了多大的錯誤，當我們試圖從文學材料中，尤其從神話中，取我們對古世的理解時犯的錯，。Traditionalresearchhas?TraditionalresearchhasconfrontedonlyMexicanandUnitedStatesinterpretationsofMexican-Americanculture.?NowwemustalsoexaminethecultureasweMexicanAmericanshaveexperiencedit,passingfromasovereignpeopletocompatriotswithnewlyarrivingsettlersto,finally,aconqueredpeople—acharter(agrantorguaranteeofrights,franchises,orprivilegesfromthesovereignpowerofastateorcountry)minorityonourownland.?對墨西哥文化的傳統研究一直著只有來自墨西哥的和的兩種解釋。?對于這種文化，現在我們也必須按照美籍墨西哥人所經歷的那樣來，從一個獨立自主的民族變成新來居民的同胞，最后變成一個被征服的民族，一個在自己的土地上持有的少數民族。?WhentheSpanishfirstcametoMexico,theyintermarriedwithandabsorbedthecultureoftheindigenousns.?Thisofcolonizationthroughacculturationwas whenMexicoacquiredTexasintheearly1800’sandbroughttheindigenousnsintoMexicanlifeand ernment.?Inthe1820’s,UnitedStatescitizensmigratedtoTexas,attractedbylandsuitableforcotton.?Astheirnumbersbecamemoresubstantial,theirofacquiringlandbysubduingnativepopulationsbegantodominate.?Thetwoideologiesclashedrepeatedly,culminatinginamilitary thatledtovictoryfortheUnitedStates.?Thus,suddenlydeprivedofourparentculture,wehadtoevolveuniquelyMexican-Americanmodesofthoughtandactioninordertosurvive.19世紀初的墨西哥取得Txs19世紀20年代時，民因Txs土地適宜種植棉花而遷移到那。民人數越來越多時，用征服本地人的辦法來獲取土地的政策開始盛行。?兩種思想不斷發生，發展到頂點就爆發了軍事，結果獲勝。?這樣，墨西哥人突然被了自己的傳統文化，為了Throughouthuman?Throughouthumanhistorytherehavebeenmanystringenttaboosconcerningwatchingotherpeopleeatoreatinginthepresenceofothers.?Therehavebeenattemptstoexinthesetaboosintermsofinappropriatesocialrelationshipseitherbetweenthosewhoareinvolvedandthosewhoarenotsimultaneouslyinvolvedinthesatisfactionofabodilyneed,orbetweenthosealreadysatiatedandthosewhoappeartobeshamelessly?Undoubtedlysuchelementsexistinthetaboos,butthereisanadditionalelementwithamuchmorefundamentalimportance.?Inprehistorictimes,whenfoodwassopreciousandth