バートランド・ラッセル『反俗評論集-人類の将来』第1章(松下彰良・訳)
* 原著:Bertrand Russell: Unpopular Essays, 1950
第1章「哲学と政治(1947)」n.1
私の講演の主題である,哲学と政治との関係は、(これまで)イギリスにおいては、(ヨーロッパ)大陸諸国ほど、明らかではなかった。経験主義は、大ざっぱに言って、自由主義(リベラリズム)と結びついているが、しかし、(経験主義者の)ヒューム は保守主義者であった。また哲学者が「観念論」と呼ぶものは、一般的に、保守主義との同様の結びつきを持っているが、(観念論者の)T. H・グリーンは自由主義者(リベラル)であった。ヨーロッパ大陸では、イギリスよりももっと区別がはっきりしており、、その学説の部分部分を批判的に吟味することなく、一塊の学説を一つの全体として、受け入れるか拒否する傾向が(これまで)ずっと強く存在している。 |
Philosophy and Politics, (1947), n.1The British are distinguished among the nations of modern Europe, on the one hand by the excellence of their philosophers, and on the other hand by their contempt for philosophy. In both respects they show their wisdom. But contempt for philosophy, if developed to the point at which it becomes systematic, is itself a philosophy; it is the philosophy which, in America, is called “instrumentalism.” I shall suggest that philosophy, if it is bad philosophy, may be dangerous, and therefore deserves that degree of negative respect which we accord to lightning and tigers. What positive respect may be due to “good” philosophy I will leave for the moment an open question.The connection of philosophy with politics, which is the subject of my lecture, has been less evident in Britain than in Continental countries. Empiricism, broadly speaking, is connected with liberalism, but Hume was a Tory; what philosophers call “idealism” has, in general, a similar connection with conservatism, but T. H. Green was a Liberal. On the Continent distinctions have been more clear cut, and there has been a greater readiness to accept or reject a block of doctrines as a whole, without critical scrutiny of each separate part. |